From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C484C7F50 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 11:31:01 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 11:30:58 -0500 From: Ben Myers Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 05/11] xfs: Do some whitespace cleanup in the data structure xfs_quotainfo Message-ID: <20130628163058.GW20932@sgi.com> References: <1372371914-11370-1-git-send-email-sekharan@us.ibm.com> <1372371914-11370-6-git-send-email-sekharan@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1372371914-11370-6-git-send-email-sekharan@us.ibm.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Chandra Seetharaman Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Hey Chandra, On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 05:25:08PM -0500, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > In preparation for combined pquota/gquota support, do some > whitespace cleanups. > > Signed-off-by: Chandra Seetharaman Wow. Putting this in a patch by itself really puts it into stark relief. If we pull this in we're representing that some tabs and the alignment of the fields is more valuable than the comments? I'm fairly certain I don't agree that's the case... I'm sorry for your trouble, but I think I should pass on this one. Do you agree? Thanks, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs