From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FC2E40C for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 19:02:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (relay3-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.195]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3D9114F for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 19:02:26 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:02:23 -0700 From: josh@joshtriplett.org To: Steven Rostedt Message-ID: <20150717190223.GB1499@cloud> References: <20150711001348.GA30675@kroah.com> <20150711055441.GA6316@sudip-PC> <20150715212043.775be5d2@gandalf.local.home> <20150716132551.GH4039@sirena.org.uk> <20150716094720.2bf9f5ac@gandalf.local.home> <55A7C7FE.6000604@sonymobile.com> <20150716094125.16cdda73@lwn.net> <1437063875.18768.59.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20150717101151.5d5bc86d@lwn.net> <20150717133712.42c82add@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150717133712.42c82add@gandalf.local.home> Cc: James Bottomley , Jason Cooper , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:37:12PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:11:51 -0600 > Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > > > Over on linux-kernel, I just saw a newish developer being politely told > > that a patch was unacceptable because the local variable declarations > > were not in reverse-Christmas-tree order. That's not in CodingStyle, and > > it's certainly not a universal rule in the kernel; it's just one of those > > things you have to know if you wander into certain scary neighborhoods. > > As I know a few maintainers that like the "reverse-xmas-tree" order, > perhaps we could add that to CodingStyle in a section of: > > --- Some Maintainer's prefer these styles --- > > These are some extra styles that maintainers prefer. Some are strict > about these, others may not care. It doesn't hurt to add them. A world of *no*. If your style is not universal, and you can't get a general consensus among kernel maintainers that it should be a requirement across the entire kernel, then *no*. We should not have per-subsystem formatting rules. > /* > * What is the question? > * To add a space at the top of a comment? > */ > > /* Or not to add a space at the top of a comment? > * That is the question! > */ While I'm not going to advocate that we mass-fix existing code in a subsystem for consistent formatting, this is *exactly* the kind of thing that we do not need any more of; one such idiosyncrasy is one too many. - Josh Triplett