On 27 June 2011 03:20, Maciej Mrozowski <reavertm@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I personally prefer tabs, but I also like using EAPI="<version>",
>> sorting everything alphabetically and even use the following depend blocks:
>
>> *DEPEND="
>> * * * !<X-2.0
>> * * * !Y
>> * * * <A>
>> * * * <B>
>> * * * ...
>> * * * <Z>
>> * * * a? ( <X> )
>> * * * b? ( <Y> )
>> * * * c? (
>> * * * * * * * <J>
>> * * * * * * * <K>
>> * * * )
>> "
>
> ^^ is actually the main point of my "ebuild formatting nazi" agenda (usually
> followed by "oh why did you break formatting in my shiny ebuild!11, revert!"
> chants by various developers in case I happened to touch packages of theirs).
>
> I never understood the reason after keeping deps not sorted alphabetically
> where order doesn't matter - it's like someone purposely made ebuild harder to
> read - it's counter productive.
>

In the case where upstream also have a rather well structured
dependency list that is prone to change ( ie: perl modules ) I've
found it beneficial to keep the dependencies in the same order as they
use upstream.

Makes it much easier to check later and makes it much easier to notice
when they add a dependency

--
Kent

perl -e* "print substr( "edrgmaM* SPA NOcomil.ic@tfrken", $_ * 3,
3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );"

http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz

On Sunday, June 26, 2011 12:51:53 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 13:51, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 10:23, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> >>>> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 6:16 PM, justin wrote:
> >>>>> Another question, do we have a rule, how the metadata.xml has to be
> >>>>> indented? Tabs or n spaces?
> >>>>
> >>>> There's no rule, but we should follow the same rule as ebuilds —
> >>>> indentation should be with a tab that's displayed as 4 spaces in
> >>>> editors (no expansion of tabs to spaces).
> >>>
> >>> meh ... let devs do whatever they want
> >>
> >> Didn't I just say there's no rule?
> >
> > and if you keep reading, you'll see that you also said "devs should XXX"
>
> should != must.

and all i said was "devs should do whatever they want"

> I understand that you're touchy about rules after the whole ChangeLog
> mess, but must we debate the nuances of the English language and
> contribute to the massive amount of pre-existing bikeshed noise on
> this mailing list?

i'm really not. i dont why you read more into it than is actually there. if
anything, your responses seem a bit more touchy.
-mike

В В�к, 26/06/2011 в 17:20 +0200, Maciej Mrozowski пишет:
> I never understood the reason after keeping deps not sorted alphabetically
> where order doesn't matter - it's like someone purposely made ebuild harder to
> read - it's counter productive.

Like with perl modules with well written configure.ac I like them to be
sorted in the order there. This way makes easier for me to see if there
is anything redundant in deps or not.

--
Peter.

В В�к, 26/06/2011 в 17:20 +0200, Maciej Mrozowski пишет:
> I never understood the reason after keeping deps not sorted alphabetically
> where order doesn't matter - it's like someone purposely made ebuild harder to
> read - it's counter productive.

Like with perl modules with well written configure.ac I like them to be
sorted in the order there. This way makes easier for me to see if there
is anything redundant in deps or not.

--
Peter.

В Сбт, 25/06/2011 в 13:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 10:23, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 6:16 PM, justin wrote:
> >> Another question, do we have a rule, how the metadata.xml has to be
> >> indented? Tabs or n spaces?
> >
> > There's no rule, but we should follow the same rule as ebuilds —
> > indentation should be with a tab that's displayed as 4 spaces in
> > editors (no expansion of tabs to spaces).
>
> meh ... let devs do whatever they want

Why? This looks like perfect case to use standard indentation.
Personally I'd like indentation to be fixed (and I don't really care
how).

--
Peter.

В Сбт, 25/06/2011 в 13:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 10:23, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 6:16 PM, justin wrote:
> >> Another question, do we have a rule, how the metadata.xml has to be
> >> indented? Tabs or n spaces?
> >
> > There's no rule, but we should follow the same rule as ebuilds —
> > indentation should be with a tab that's displayed as 4 spaces in
> > editors (no expansion of tabs to spaces).
>
> meh ... let devs do whatever they want

Why? This looks like perfect case to use standard indentation.
Personally I'd like indentation to be fixed (and I don't really care
how).

--
Peter.

On Tuesday, June 28, 2011 08:02:03 Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Сбт, 25/06/2011 в 13:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет:
> > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 10:23, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 6:16 PM, justin wrote:
> > >> Another question, do we have a rule, how the metadata.xml has to be
> > >> indented? Tabs or n spaces?
> > >
> > > There's no rule, but we should follow the same rule as ebuilds —
> > > indentation should be with a tab that's displayed as 4 spaces in
> > > editors (no expansion of tabs to spaces).
> >
> > meh ... let devs do whatever they want
>
> Why? This looks like perfect case to use standard indentation.
> Personally I'd like indentation to be fixed (and I don't really care
> how).

these files are so small/minor, and now we tread into xml territory which has
much less standardized indenting and line wrapping rules. it isnt simply a
matter of "how much space do i put before an open tag". i really dont see it
being a "problem" that needs "solving".
-mike