On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Paul Lathrop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Luke Kanies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> As was pointed out to me, this patch contains lots of whitespace >> patches, which breaks one of the rules we've added (no trivial changes >> included in patches). >> >> I agree with this rule in principle, but... I think I would tend just >> not to fix this kind of problem if I had to do it as part of a >> different patch set. > > I would have a huge problem not being able to fix whitespace problems > in the general course of development. I disagree both in principle and > practice with this idea. Maybe someone could convince me otherwise? > > What possible gain is there in abiding by this rule? >
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the rule. My understanding is the rule is: If you fix whitespace or spelling, *only* do that in a given patch. *Don't* mix other fixes in. If the rule is actually * Never fix whitespace or spelling* then I agree with you that I don't see a point in it. Steven --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
