Re: [PATCH] jffs2 whitespace

["Artem B. Bityutskiy" <dedekind@yandex.ru>]

Jörn Engel wrote:
> I'm not sure about this.  Apart from the binary operator cases, your
> changes are definitely a slight improvement.  But the patch is also
> peeing on every lantern pole in the county:
>  61 files changed, 1677 insertions(+), 1713 deletions(-)
> 
> How can I trust you that you didn't introduce a security problem on
> line 6789 of your 9485 line patch, by intention or not.  I'd have to
> read it all, which is quite boring.
> 
> And if all goes well, pretty much every single patch maintained
> outside of cvs would break after merging this.  There must be a
> collision _somewhere_, after all.
> 
> So I guess the short answer is "no".
> 
> My usual approach to whitespace cleanup, btw., is as a first step
> before I change some code anyway.  Even whitespace patches should get
> tested and since I need some testing anyway and they help me read and
> change the code, the cleanup is gaining me more than it costs.

Well, I looked through the patch and have not found anything really bad. 
Some changes are neutral, but as for me the patch is OK. And why should 
we care about external patches? Let people work them out and regenerate. :-)

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem B. Bityuckiy,
St.-Petersburg, Russia.