Re: [OE-core] Patchwork & patch handling improvements


Richard Purdie
 

On Wed, 2015-12-02 at 10:20 -0500, Philip Balister wrote:
On 12/02/2015 03:44 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Mon, 2015-11-30 at 10:19 -0500, Trevor Woerner wrote:
On 11/26/15 16:00, Paul Eggleton wrote:
I think the areas where there are disagreements are comparatively small,
really just on shell whitespace. Where they do exist, they are
problematic, not least as some layers effectively ignored an agreement
made by the TSC simply because they didn't agree with it. It basically
means the OE TSC only applies to OE-Core as far as I can tell, which is
sad but is the decision that was made. This also means the TSC has no
real influence over any proposed coding style being used outside
OE-Core.
Can you remind us what the whitespace argument is again? I forget, and I
think it is important that everyone understand the details.
At the time we fixed python functions to use four space indentation and
no tabs. This matches python recommendations and avoided issues with
some version of python which became stricter about whitespace if I
remember rightly, something like that anyway. Regardless, there was a
pressing reason to fix things to one format.

There was a proposal we should standardise shell functions too. One of
our style guides said tabs, one said spaces. Most of OE-Core was tabs.
Rather than change everything, the TSC discussed and agreed to leave as
tabs rather than have patch churn although it was a tough decision and a
lot of discussion. meta-oe standardised on four space indentation for
shell since they believed the TSC to be wrong.

There are clearly arguments either way, not least that editor settings
are easier if its all spaces rather than having to be context aware.

Cheers,

Richard

Join openembedded-architecture@lists.openembedded.org to automatically receive all group messages.