I remember discussing this issue a while ago on the mailing list [1]. There were two votes in favor from Benjamin Hindman and Benjamin Mahler, and no votes against it. There’s also an accepted Jira entry MESOS-2673 to add the ordering into our style guide.
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mesos-dev/201505.mbox/%3ccadcam2slfjl2h4wvxjxbpxgykfxfs3ciccfpwk_3q4q-6mt...@mail.gmail.com%3E <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mesos-dev/201505.mbox/%3ccadcam2slfjl2h4wvxjxbpxgykfxfs3ciccfpwk_3q4q-6mt...@mail.gmail.com%3E> > On 10 Nov 2015, at 17:35, Jan Schlicht <[email protected]> wrote: > > Currently there is no consensus on the order of includes. I'm currently > working on MESOS-2275 and would suggest, that we follow the rules from the > Google C++ Style Guide ( > https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Names_and_Order_of_Includes) > as much as possible but also follow the current grouping of includes by > their level of indirection. > > One important question that came up on RR ( > https://reviews.apache.org/r/39449/) is, if we should include the "related > header" of a source file first. Currently this header is included like any > other header. How about we should change that practice and include this > header first to avoid hidden dependencies? > > -- > *Jan Schlicht* > Distributed Systems Engineer, Mesosphere
