[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [PATCH] Issue 1628

From: <kfogel_at_collab.net>
Date: 2005-07-25 22:31:33 CEST

"Valik" <vampirevalik@hotmail.com> writes:
> > We are generally willing to fix up stylistic problems. What we need
> > to do is make it *clear* that we are willing to do so, and that our
> > comments are usually meant to convey a sentiment like: "If you're
> > resubmitting this (for substantive reasons) anyway, would you mind
> > fixing these stylistic issues as well?".
>
> I think you need to "get with the boys" on this one. Branko clearly
> states, "...because even a technically perfect patch wouldn't be
> accepted if style wasn't correct" which is contrast to what you are
> saying above. I think one of the minor problems is there isn't an
> official stance on the matter and it's up to an individual committer as
> to how much effort they are willing to expend.

No, "the boys", or rather, the boy, needs to get with me :-).

Branko was simply wrong. And I'll bet he will admit that if he
happens read this followup. (*He* might not apply such a patch, but
many, many such patches have been applied. And, actually, he probably
would too, if it were good in other ways.)

> Then I've done all I set out to do. My goal was to make you think.
> I've tried to keep things light-hearted enough so as not to piss anybody
> off but to also get your wheels to turning to find a solution. I've
> also tried to use redundancy to repeat myself (!) to point out to things
> I think are most important. Just to sum up real quick (for another
> added layer of redundancy), a tidy program is a good idea to invest some
> time in acquiring and working on the perception to be less stylistically
> focused. If you do the former, then the perception will be changed by
> default since the quantity of stylistic comments will decrease
> substantially.

Any help with the tidy program thing would be most appreciated (I've
never used one myself, so I'm starting from zero on that).

> And again, as with before, I'm not trying to call anybody out, not even
> Branko. I'm only taking what I see and interpreting it (And trying not
> to be a spin-doctor in the process). I have to emphasize things a bit
> because the intended audience is so close to the problem that the best
> way to get them to see it is to make it really big. That's all I'm
> trying to do.

For future reference, it is not necessary. For example, Mark's post
was already enough, and he didn't overstate his case. You don't need
to either; the fact that you got your desired result by overstating
does not prove that overstating was necessary. You would have gotten
the same result without it :-).

-Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jul 25 23:28:59 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.