On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:33 PM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> wrote:
> Karl Fogel wrote:
> > Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> writes:
> >
> >> If blame information is really that important, we should scratch the
> >> patch altogether. Otherwise I'd still rather opt for consistent style.
> >>
> >> I stumbled across this because Steve is looking into adding code to
> >> one of the files in question, and we could not figure out the correct
> >> style to use for new code.
> >>
> >> So I asked in IRC what style new code should use. Erik Huelsmann said
> >> the project was aiming at keeping the style consistent within modules.
> >> Since libsvn_ra's style is totally ambiguous, I created the patch to
> >> make it consistent.
> >>
> >> So, for me, it's not about being tidy for the sake of it, but because
> >> of the benefits consistency provides when adding or modying code.
> >>
> >
> > I think consistency is worth it too. Maybe apply this after 1.5 is
> > released?
> >
>
> ... after which there will be no more backports?
>
> "A foolish consistency" etc. I vote we leave well enough alone.
We reformatted *all* our sources (remember Subversion-with-space?). I
really don't get you all (not you personally) keep talking about
backporting problems. We're *not* a closed source project with 115
variants for different customers we need to support until 2030; we
only have 1 or 2 active release branches: the cost of backporting is
only 2, not 115.
bye,
Erik who votes for consistency.
Received on 2008-03-03 20:42:35 CET