minutes of ESC call ...
sbergman at redhat.com
Wed Nov 8 08:44:02 UTC 2017
On 11/03/2017 10:05 AM, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 11/02/2017 06:10 PM, Michael Meeks wrote:
>> * clang-format-ness (Miklos)
>> + propose merge step#1 without clang-format enforced (Michael)
>> + don’t like the auto-re-format of others’ commits (Stephan)
>> + if want to have enforced – make sure all commits is
>> formatted right
>> or we get these issues.
> To maybe clarify that a bit: I see no value at all in enforcing any
> formatting as an end in itself. I only see it as a means to drop the
> future amount of reformatting commits to zero. (What I mean with
> "reformatting commits" is both commits that do no changes other than
> reformatting source code, as well as commits that mix---related, or even
> unrelated---reformatting of source code with some "real" changes. Either
> form creates "noise" that makes it harder to inspect individual git
> commits and the git history.)
> The only way I see how we can reach that goal of zero future
> reformatting commits is to have the invariant that all commits to the
> central git repo are enforce-formatted (after one round of "big noise"
> reformatting any existing source code, if we ever get there).
And, just to clarify, for me that means that enforcement on new files
cannot be opt-in based on whatever personal concerns, as might be read
out of the commit message of
"test: clang-format recently added xsheet tests": "Jens says he was
unhappy with the 80 cols limit, so clang-format was explicitly avoided
for these new files [...]"
More information about the LibreOffice