Re: Mixing whitespace and topical changes

[Didier Verna <didier@xemacs.org>]

Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc> wrote:

>>         Now, this part really upsets me :-( [...]. Gnus is an
>> independant project, 
>
> If Gnus wasn't a part of Emacs, we would not have to require a
> copyright assignment for non-trivial contributions (you also signed
> it, so you should be aware of it).

        Of course. Although I can't remember exactly whether I signed
for a GNU software, or for GNU Emacs specifically. But in any case, you
can't deny that Gnus a somewhat "special" part of GNU Emacs for the
reasons I stated. I don't hack GNU Emacs[1], and AFAICT, most GNU Emacs
developpers don't hack Gnus. Yet, you explained that we should adhere to
their coding style.



>>> Beside yourself, nobody argued in favor of those "by-the-way
>>> whitespace changes".
>>
>>         So what ? When I think the majority is wrong, I try to convince
>> the majority. Wouldn't you ?
>
> Note that this was a reply to...
>>>> Note that I will accept whatever decision the majority adopts
> ... so I tried to point out that the majority (at least of those who
> participated in the previous discussions) doesn't agree.
>
> [ You may even replace Emacs developers with Gnus developers in the
>   paragraph above that upset you. ]

        That's not necessarily true BTW, I think Yamaoka San was not as
strongly opposed as you are to my point of view.

        But let me explain again: I was initially trying to convince the
Gnus committers. If I had failed, that would have been fine with me. But
then, you pointed out that it was not a matter of convincing the Gnus
Team, but the whole GNU Emacs team, and that, for the reason that we
should adhere to their coding style (which I consider illegitimate). 
That's what upset me. Only that.


> _Not introducing_ trailing whitespace is different to "cleanup"
> leading spaces to tabs.

        Hmmm. So we actually disagree on the kinds of whitespace cleanup
that should be authorized ? What about spaces followed by tabs ?


> If we'd agree that every Gnus developer should follows your proposal:
> How do you propose to ensure this?

        By providing 4 lines of code for their .emacs.


>>         OK, you made an illegitimate yet strong point. 
>
> Making synchronization between v5-10 and the trunk as simple as
> possible is illegitimate?

        I've clarified what I consider illegitimate a few paragraphs
above.


> But I don't think to accuse me of writing bullshit is good style.

        There was nothing personal in what I said. You stated a fact
that upset me. It is the *fact* that you stated which upset me, not the
fact that you *stated* it. Err, do you see what I mean ? :-)



Footnotes: 
[1]  Actually, I did once: I rewrote rect.el for both Emacsen and then
they didn't report back the changes they made to it afterwards :-/

-- 
Read the Jazz Blog !! http://jazzblog.didierverna.com

Didier Verna, didier@lrde.epita.fr, http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier

EPITA / LRDE, 14-16 rue Voltaire   Tel.+33 (1) 44 08 01 85
94276 Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France   Fax.+33 (1) 53 14 59 22   didier@xemacs.org