On 03/26/2012 01:01 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 17:45, Anthony Liguori<anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
Is this something we universally want to do? What would we do about patches
to audio?
I'd do it in cases when there is code movement, then git blame will
not be very useful anyway and other people have to rebase their
patches as well.
The audio case has an additional factor, namely maintainer disagreeing
with global style and consistency. There are several ways how to
handle that case, one of which is to maintain status quo.
I'd prefer not to go down this road. Let's keep discussion of fixing
CODING_STYLE of existing code separate from rearchitecting/enhancing code.
When code is moved, rearchitected or enhanced, that would be a good
point when to fix style too. Though this assumes that just fixing
style without those events is evil, but is it? I think you have not
been fully consistent in this matter.
I think modifying coding style alone is evil.
But I'm also sick of arguing about coding style. If you take this patch series
as an example, this is the beginning of a fundamental refactoring to how we do
machines and devices in QEMU--and yet, we're discussing coding style.
I don't see an obvious way to just get past the coding style discussions. If
there was a perfect way to automate fixing coding style, at this point, I would
say let's do it. But there is no way I want to spend the next two years taking
coding style fixup patches.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Regards,
Anthony Liguori