the DRM is in a bad way with respect to whitespace, I know people have
objections to whitespace patches in bitkeeper, but after cleaning up all
the code, I'd like to Lindent it all as well, the DRM macro removal
touched every function in every file...
as the DRM is developed in the CVS tree, and nearly all the blame
annotation in bitkeeper blames me I don't think it is really a bad thing
for the DRM...
Objections?
Dave.
--
David Airlie, Software Engineer
http://www.skynet.ie/~airlied / airlied at skynet.ie
pam_smb / Linux DECstation / Linux VAX / ILUG person
Dave Airlie <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> the DRM is in a bad way with respect to whitespace, I know people have
> objections to whitespace patches in bitkeeper, but after cleaning up all
> the code, I'd like to Lindent it all as well, the DRM macro removal
> touched every function in every file...
>
> as the DRM is developed in the CVS tree, and nearly all the blame
> annotation in bitkeeper blames me I don't think it is really a bad thing
> for the DRM...
>
> Objections?
Is up to you, really. I doubt if you'll hear many objections to DRM macro
removal and whitespace cleanups.
It's probably best that you wait until the tree is in good shape and stable
for a week or two before doing the big reformat because it will introduce a
barrier over which patches may not pass in either direction.
> It's probably best that you wait until the tree is in good shape and stable
> for a week or two before doing the big reformat because it will introduce a
> barrier over which patches may not pass in either direction.
well as most patches come via the CVS tree and myself it shouldn't be
too bad, the CVS tree has been Lindented for a couple of months so
I've been dealing with the issues myself as I pass the patches back
and forth...
Dave.