On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > >> Yes. Jed is too in love with Git to ever do this so you have to. >> > > What does this have to do with choice of VCS? They all support commit > hooks. > > >> > >> > - Add nightly tests on the source tree. We can compare the output of a >> properly configured uncrustify against the existing source files and >> complain on a mismatch. >> >> The problem is that uncrustify is exactly the PETSc style so we >> can't do that comparison automatically. Otherwise we would just run >> uncrustify on all pushes. >> > > The sha1 changes when you change whitespace so it'll be messy to do on > push (rather than on commit) because the pusher will need to zap their old > version of the patches. (Note that the push might happen after merging in > release-3.3, for example, so it gets nasty.) > Some projects (e.g., moose) reject a noncompliant push. The committer can then rewrite the patch locally before it is published and resubmit. Dmitry. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130115/3cfccfcc/attachment.html>
