From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/40] whitespace: remediate t1006-cat-file.sh Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2011 10:56:00 -0700 Message-ID: <7vmxfm1l1r.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1312620119-18369-1-git-send-email-jon.seymour@gmail.com> <1312620294-18616-1-git-send-email-jon.seymour@gmail.com> <1312620294-18616-3-git-send-email-jon.seymour@gmail.com> <20110806092856.GB7645@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jon Seymour , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Aug 06 19:56:13 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qpl6Z-0006vQ-3Y for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Aug 2011 19:56:11 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756588Ab1HFR4F (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Aug 2011 13:56:05 -0400 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:56442 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756401Ab1HFR4E (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Aug 2011 13:56:04 -0400 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1905B4EDE; Sat, 6 Aug 2011 13:56:03 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=0yzcUvXM1W4b6KTf7D4QoGty4sE=; b=x3lMNL 2kSyfVupbiYWLrYobG95wbrgf2Rb+7v3G3QuRWxvuQ30TnIZitRQwR1QDe9jJT7Q FlRkz/Bq1F4F9S1HEqwMx+hOPH8/Trr3sjUI733yMnLIqMKouzP9AKTOltu2xWTM w4jY59O3YqWKbRCckuaEvotXEINwjAv7KLSdU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ab1HudEPSyrbbd0jki0Y8Mw5fx6wvL9U Qg2zlKwXgWE0n+1kdqBbvGijch3b4LNjnDl5rmzh7AzPlfnqm3cJwDmqwKeBpFhD hV7HY8Wpe5QEIx4zW+eftqFnkqTz3gN+QXeSjnW+aKw4Jht8mgR5Q5MjASI7oRIJ ZmEvF3dFH5E= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10C0C4EDD; Sat, 6 Aug 2011 13:56:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 70D874EDC; Sat, 6 Aug 2011 13:56:02 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20110806092856.GB7645@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Sat, 6 Aug 2011 03:28:57 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5956D848-C055-11E0-9334-1DC62E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > Yes, this indent with spaces violates our coding style policy. However, > the 4-space indentation does, too (and the space between function name > and parentheses). The "right" way is according to our policy is: > > maybe_remove_timestamp() { > if test -z "$2"; then > echo_without_newline "$1" Hmm, I have always thought that our shell scripts preferred the above to be spelled this way instead: maybe_remove_timestamp () { if test -z "$2" then echo_without_newline "$1" > So I have to wonder if this automated indentation is really worthwhile. That I agree with. > I dunno. I'm not against a one-time cleanup,... I actually am slightly against it. One-time whole-tree clean-up can never happen without downside as _some_ parts of the tree always have patches to conflict with it in flight. One-time decision to clearly spell out the rules and cleaning the tree over time, fixing parts that are not actively touched one at a time, is probably feasible, though.