obnox at samba.org
Sun Jul 24 15:34:30 MDT 2011
Christian M Ambach wrote:
> 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.
Yes, I reviewed and found (and find) it OK. And I also thought
that it would not be controversal in this case, because Christian
_did_ make some other changes to that module. I was not aware that
we had a policy of not doing bool-value-change-commits to files
but may only change them in lines that we touch anyways.
I also did not mean to cause such uproar. :-)
I will wait for the outcome of our discussion before doing such
commits or advising further in this direction.
Cheers - Michael
PS: I also think that changing False->false (and so on) is slightly
more than just reformatting. But that is not the main point here.
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 206 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the samba-technical