On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho <miguel.fi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 3:56 PM, malc <av1...@comtv.ru> wrote: >> >> While intentions of this are good, i believe this goes too far, i doubt >> that the proposed additions are enforcable and have no doubts that they >> will be widely ignored and at the same time provide more grounds for >> whining. Furthermore the existing code doesn't follow them, going out on >> a limb, it's more likely that one would look around the code he/she >> modifies and base his/her modifications on the surrounding code than to >> follow the style that conflicts with it. > > The existing code that I have touched don't follow the current coding > style guidance, much less all the new recommendations being suggested. > > Although, I do believe that this situation needs to change. If we > agree in a coding style, I would volunteer to be a some kind of > observer to fix and alert people about coding styles mistakes.
I fully agree on the need of change and support your excellent idea. There are other ways to solve the problem, but I believe we need more order than more chaos. Perhaps we the QEMU developers should appoint you the Guardian of the CODING_STYLE, and add a rule that no patch shall be committed without your CS-Acked-by line?