Hi, > Yes, I'm aware of that. Since we have to update hgrc for the > BuildSystem anyway, it's 'just another line'. > > > Yeah, well, I still think it's rude for a build script to mess with the > user's private repository configuration. We only get away with it > because beginners don't know better and experts usually configure their > system so it doesn't run (e.g., by pulling BuildSystem themselves) or > know that it's running.
It may be rude, but it only affects those who consider pushing to petsc-dev. Among these few, how many keep a private repository configuration? For all others, we ask them to send patches, so we can still control the formatting issue. > > Eventually we can come up with a hook that aggregates multiple > commits, i.e. the user only needs to add a follow-up commit fixing > the violation rather than fiddling with the history. > > > This is horrible because the aggregating commit will touch lots of > irrelevant lines. If it does more than change whitespace, git/hg can't > even give us a diff that looks past that rearrangement. It's important > for every commit making it into the repository to be formatted consistently. In such case I'm afraid I have no idea about how to ensure correct formatting other than hoping that users run pre-commit checks... :-( Best regards, Karli
