river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Reedy <dennis.re...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Re: Formatting of River Source Tree
Date Thu, 09 Dec 2010 19:04:26 GMT

On Dec 9, 2010, at 200PM, Sim IJskes - QCG wrote:

> On 12/09/2010 06:37 PM, Christopher Dolan wrote:
>> Yes, sorry, I replied to the wrong email...  I meant to react to the
>> proposal of:
>> 
>>  - I want to make a meaningful change to Class A.
>>  - Class A is badly formatted.
>>  - I fix the formatting of Class A.
>>  - I commit Class A.
>>  - I make my meaningful change to Class A.
>>  - I commit Class A.
>> 
>> I think steps #3 and #4 are a bad idea.  Your endorsement of that
> 
> Do you object to the formatting or the intermediate commit? Do you think the scope of
the class is too big, should it be only the method that is fixed? Or are you completely against
reformatting?
> 
> I think it is a bit too much to write 'we forbid', it is an adult fixing the source,
for free, shouldn't we allow a bit of freedom in this case?

I agree. If source is difficult to read and it can be improved by reformatting, then why not
reformat and commit. Its on an as needed basis, after all.

Dennis
Mime
View raw message