> On 8 Feb 2018, at 11:09, Victor Toso <victort...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:01:05AM -0500, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>>>> Depends on many cases. You don't want spurious changes to make harder to
>>>> look at the history for instance (that is a point for Nack).
>>>> The patch is not fixing anything or adding new feature (another for Nack).
>>>> On the other hand applied to code not changed for a long period (where is
>>>> unlikely to have to dig the history) or code with small history (where
>>>> is faster to skip in any case) changes.
>>>> Being style it depends also on personal opinions.
>>> You can’t have it both ways. Here, you are simultaneously saying:
>>> - We don’t want trailing whitespace
>> OT: Not only trailing, also tabs for instance.
>>> - We nack patches that fix trailing whitespace on their own
>> Not saying that, I'm saying is not black and white.
> Because the code itself is inconsistent. It would be so much
> better to have a few patches that make the code consistent and
> then some git hook to check if given patch does not mess around
> the coding style instead of discussing this so many times over
I thought I was requesting even less than a big fix. I was only requesting to
allow small fixes. But if Frediano does not want this, then I would go with you
and say we fix it once and then enforce it.
> Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel mailing list