Isn't it just a very tiny file? Seems a small price to pay to make it easier for folks.
I'd say commit it...what's to lose? -Steve B. On Jun 18, 2012 9:12 AM, "Richard Birkby" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Stephen Bohlen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think I'm a little unclear about the goal of this. My initial thought >> was that if someone couldn't be expected to load a .vssettings file then >> getting them to install a plugin seems an even longer-shot :) >> > > I never intended NHibernate to force contributors to install a plug-in! I > see this system as making it easier for: > > 1. Existing contributors switching between projects with different > tabs/spaces settings > 2. New contributors who see the paragraph about the EditorConfig > plugin and realize installing a 76K plug-in will help them with settings > 3. Contributors who use other editors (eg Sublime2) to editor NH code > > But then I realized that the intent here might be more about providing a >> mechanism that would (more easily) support NH contributors using tabs when >> working on NH but spaces when working on other projects. Is that the >> case? I guess I'm trying to understand whether this .editorconfig approach >> is targeting 'regular contributors' or 'casual, one-time >> pull-requesters'. Can you elaborate? >> > > Currently, the only benefit to the one-time pull-requesters is maybe that > they read the tiny paragraph about tabs/spaces and editorconfig. In the > future *if* editorconfig gets more traction (and it looks like it is*), > then a one-time pull requester will likely already have the plug-in > installed. > > In either case, since having the .editorconfig file doesn't case *trouble* >> for anyone not running the plugin (right?), I don't have any issue with >> committing one to the repo. But I'd also think that doing that *instead* >> of providing a .vssettings file probably isn't going to be sufficient for >> the 'casual' contributor (e.g., telling them they have to install a vs >> plugin to contribute to NH is increased friction that I'd think we'd want >> to avoid). >> > > I'm also very aware that adding extra stuff to a repo increases complexity > in the same way as C# new features start at -100 points. > If no-one else thinks this is a good idea, that's fine. Everyone can keep > the .editorconfig local to them. > > > Richard > * https://twitter.com/paul_irish/statuses/212975948503588864 >
