Reformatting code

Christian M Ambach christian.ambach at de.ibm.com
Fri Jul 22 11:10:19 MDT 2011


Hi Volker,
 
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 04:50:02PM +0200, Christian Ambach wrote:
> >> The branch, master has been updated
> >>        via  fb766cd s3-waf: fix a libcrypto configure check
> >>        via  bca69bf s3:winbindd remove an unused variable
> >>        via  410c4de s3:utils fix a compiler warning
> >>        via  62825b0 s3:modules/vfs_afsacl fix a compiler warning
> >>        via  4370dc1 s3:afs make path argument to afs_syscall const
> >>        via  dcd10fa s3:modules/vfs_afsacl fix a compiler warning
> >>        via  c5cbdc2 s3:modules/vfs_afsacl use stdbool types
> > 
> > Can somebody PLEASE explain to me what the point of these
> > checkins is? What functional change makes False->false
> > necessary except to just clutter the git blame?

Sorry, I didn't want to upset you. I had read your mail to Andrew
about similar checkins too late, otherwise I would have left them
out of the patchset. Besides that, I asked Michael Adam for a quick
review of the patchset before I pushed it and he didn't object.
Looking through the git log, there are various of such commits so
I thought it be a good idea to do this while I was cleaning up
the AFS related code.

> > I had thought pure reformatting is not wanted by our coding
> > style as it also clutters git blame output. If that has
> > changed recently, I do apologize for my misunderstanding and
> > I would appreciate a pointer to the relevant discussion
> > thread.
> 
> http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/2011-June/078234.html

This mail and the previous checkins made me think that it is considered
useful to eliminate True/False from code when working on it.
 
I'll wait for the outcome of this discussion before pushing similar
commits, hopefully there is an agreement.

Cheers,
Christian 



More information about the samba-technical mailing list