Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:06:06 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, William Grzybowski <wg@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r322724 - head/net-p2p/qbittorrent Message-ID: <20130711130606.GB72196@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20130711125000.GA31005@lonesome.com> References: <201307101754.r6AHshZl027414@svn.freebsd.org> <20130711054533.GA70334@FreeBSD.org> <20130711125000.GA31005@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 07:50:00AM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 05:45:33AM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > 1) It gratuitously changes perfectly fine commas to (also perfectly fine > > as it might seem) bars. Gratuitous commits should generally be avoided, > > as they decrease STN ratio, and most importantly, they break 'svn blame'; > > This is exactly how I feel about non-code changes (e.g. whitespace, > headers, formatting), and why I am in general against sweeps to implement > such changes. I know Mark, and I also know and remember that I myself was accused by these reasons when cleaning up UPDATING notes. There is a difference, however: I usually touch (touched, haven't done that for a while) UPDATING after some time had passed, so highly volatile, recent notes are retained in their form for everyone's benefit; I usually group cleanup commits together in one bulk to minimize the damage. Not to mention that UPDATING information is a lot more relaxed in their importance compared to regular port updates. There should be a balance between the two. Crap (even whitespace-natured), should be removed, but at the right time, and without interfering with any functional changes. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130711130606.GB72196>