Re: [PATCH 03/40] whitespace: remediate t1006-cat-file.sh
- From
Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 6, 2011, 22:56 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAH3Anroof2p+hAkTizL4WrXv+DwTXOzM5Bi6EA8Zc2_Mvf8n8w@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vmxfm1l1r.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 3:56 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: > > I actually am slightly against it. One-time whole-tree clean-up can never > happen without downside as _some_ parts of the tree always have patches to > conflict with it in flight. One-time decision to clearly spell out the > rules and cleaning the tree over time, fixing parts that are not actively > touched one at a time, is probably feasible, though. >
I certainly agree that whole tree cleanup is disruptive when there is a lot of other stuff going on since it causes lots of merge conflicts. In my day job, I sometimes have to defer otherwise sensible refactorings because of the carnage they would cause for the daily integration.
That's what I think is nice about having an easy way to automate the cleanup+test, especially if it can be applied to arbitrary refactorings. Having earlier invested the effort in creating some refactoring heuristic, you can later easily apply the heuristic completely and consistently to a file as part of some other maintenance activity.
jon.