From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 15 08:41:43 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E77B816A4CE for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 08:41:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp4.server.rpi.edu (smtp4.server.rpi.edu [128.113.2.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94C8F43D3F for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 08:41:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.netel.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by smtp4.server.rpi.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i2FGfgoP029625; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 11:41:43 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <6.0.1.1.1.20040315084218.03b57d18@imap.sfu.ca> References: <6.0.1.1.1.20040314234126.03adbc50@imap.sfu.ca> <20040315172002.S5193@gamplex.bde.org> <6.0.1.1.1.20040315084218.03b57d18@imap.sfu.ca> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 11:41:41 -0500 To: Colin Percival From: Garance A Drosihn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . canit . ca) cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: spaces before tabs X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 16:41:44 -0000 At 8:51 AM +0000 3/15/04, Colin Percival wrote: >At 06:25 15/03/2004, Bruce Evans wrote: >>On Sun, 14 Mar 2004, Colin Percival wrote: > >> > Should I clean these up, or is it not worth bloating the >> > repository for such cosmetic fixes? >> >>It's too painful to do all at once IMO. > > Painful for whom? I've got a 2.4MB patch sitting in front >of me which fixes most of these. Painful for other people who are working on other changes, which they have checked-out in their own local files. They get their own changes tested, go to commit them, and then find they have to rework the entire thing due to conflicts with a cosmetic patch. It's only happened to me a few times, and for some of those it happened for cosmetic fixes that I had backed 100% before they were committed. That doesn't change how irritating it is when you go to commit something *you've* worked on, and realize you have to rework and retest everything that you've done because of some grand sweep of cosmetic changes that someone else committed. [note that I certainly do like to do cosmetic cleanups, but I usually do them only if I have some other reason to be working on a given set of files] I think that cosmetic fixes "just for the sake of" cosmetic fixes is much too easy. If you have something *real* to do with some set of files, then by all means clean them up before you begin. But don't do cosmetic changes just so you can say that you've done something. If you are not going to be the responsible-developer for a given set of files after doing some grand-sweep cosmetic change, then don't change that set of files. Not unless you get advance buy-in from all the developers you will be effecting. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu