On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 07:31:35PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > On Jul 25 2007 02:22, Paul Mundt wrote: > >> Perhaps CodingStyle can start being versioned, so people can opt out of > >> certain 'improvements' whenever someone has a vision, much like some > >> nameless licenses. > > > > I'd say Codingstyle is versioned by means of git commit IDs. > > > >> Personally I prefer the second style, and if there's a comment block, > >> then it makes sense to complete the tree with {}'s (the keyword here is > >> prefer, as it's a personal preference). checkpatch has been quite useful > >> for catching obviously broken things, and now it seems like it's just > >> overreaching. Perhaps this functionality can be split in to a lite > >> checkpatch for catching show-stoppers for application and then something > >> more akin to a CodingStyle validator for the folks interested in > >> arbitrarily defining convention, which they can use freely while the rest > >> of us try to get something useful done. > > > > /me thinks of ... checkpath --check-me-harder > > Yep I think the consensus is we need a > "--i-don't-agree-just-check-things-which-will-get-me-rejected-out-of-hand" > option of some sort which will restrict output to the real errors.
No, the default should be to show only the real errors. > -apw cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/