Peter Clifton wrote:
* Because he was willing to put in the effort to get it committed. I really want to encourage people to work on the code and become contributors, and telling them their hard work is for naught because someone somewhere might have an uncommitted patch that might be affected, is not acceptable to me.I was a little out of line earlier with the tone of my complaint earlier, but I still stand by my feelings that mass renames / re-indents, etc.. (without functional benefit) ... should be held off until agreement with the various developers. As it transpires, the impact of this one was relatively minor. (I've had bigger grief with mass re-indents)
Sorry for not having the capacity to just implement and donate this:- if I have trouble to comprehend code because of it's pretty printing I use indent(1)
- diff(1) has options to ignore whitespace changes and blank lines. -> why not use/produce a version of patch(1) that ignores such changes, e.g. by internally reformating to a standardized indentation and spacing?I'm not sure whether the -l option of patch handles string constants as such.
Just another 2 cents from me, Armin _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user