From owner-freebsd-doc Fri Mar 17 2:57:15 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from axl.ops.uunet.co.za (axl.ops.uunet.co.za [196.31.1.175]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B398237BC87 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2000 02:57:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sheldonh@axl.ops.uunet.co.za) Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.ops.uunet.co.za) by axl.ops.uunet.co.za with local-esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1) id 12VuR7-000GP5-00; Fri, 17 Mar 2000 12:56:57 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Doug Barton Cc: doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposal re SGML style In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 16 Mar 2000 23:41:29 PST." <38D1E1A9.F17E87F3@gorean.org> Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 12:56:57 +0200 Message-ID: <63056.953290617@axl.ops.uunet.co.za> Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 23:41:29 PST, Doug Barton wrote: > I'm not sure that I understand your emphasis on whitespace changes > though, maybe I'm just missing something. I realize it's a pita, but if > you're just making ws changes you really should do a seperate commit. My concern is more for the case where non-whitespace changes need to be committed and the changes necessitate whitespace changes (e.g. the insertion of words into a paragraph, causing an overly long line). In this case, my understanding is that the non-whitespace changes should be committed, followed by a whitespace commit to clean things up. This is the only advantage left to the proposed style since it was concluded that there's no advantage to the review process. At this stage, I'm looking for feedback on whether this is an issue significant enough to justify mandating a new style. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message