Roland Mainz wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>
>> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>>
>>> Roland Mainz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> As said I can remove them for the Makefiles+code we "own" now and the
>>>> others as late as possible since the "ident" stuff is the _major_ source
>>>> of bitrot. I don't want to play the "catch the ident changes"-game over
>>>> and over again since the time for that comes from my almost non-existing
>>>> chunk of free time...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Are you saying the ident lines in question are in the upstream source, not
>>> Sun added? If so, then leaving them in permanently and having the ON CRT
>>> waive their removal is the only sane choice. Upstream code should always
>>> be exempt from style and formatting rules such as ident removal and cstyle,
>>> since otherwise every update is an exercise in pointless time wasting.
>>>
>>>
>> Agreed, *IF* the ident keywords are *expanded* (as they should be in
>> this case). If they are not expanded with SCCS, then they can
>> potentially do more harm then good.
>>
>
> See my reply - we don't have "ident" lines in the AST codebase.
>
So, then why do we have them *anywhere*. There shouldn't be "bitrot".
You should purge them all once, and be done with it. Or am I badly
misunderstanding something here?
-- Garrett
> ----
>
> Bye,
> Roland
>
>
