On 2017-07-01 08:17, Antonio Radici wrote: > The only reason for the upstream switch was the code indenting > changes, which would have make the neomutt patch bigger than the mutt > source code, if we could get these in the main mutt source code that > can help any proposal to restructure the patch tree; just to clarify: > I'm not saying that this is a *prerequisite* for any proposal but this > is the main reason for the upstream code switch. > > Do you feel that it is possible to come up to an agreement when it > comes to the same indentation? clang-format should take care of that > pretty much automatically.
So, why can you not have a pre-configure step in debian/rules to run clang-format and apply neomutt's indentation conventions to mutt's code? I don't think you need upstream mutt's cooperation with that. -- Please *no* private Cc: on mailing lists and newsgroups Personal signed mail: please _encrypt_ and sign Don't clear-text sign: http://primate.net/~itz/blog/the-problem-with-gpg-signatures.html
