Re: changes in chord names formatting (1503, 1572) (issue 4981052)

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:28:55PM +0000, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> 
> On 11/3/11 10:50 AM, "Adam Spiers" <address@hidden> wrote:
> >and given my strong aversion to (a) a mix of indentation styles within
> >a single file, and (b) commits which mix whitespace changes with real
> >coding changes, I thought this was the best way to proceed.  But I
> >agree the sensible thing would be to fix all .scm files in one go.
> 
> There were actually some comments from senior developers opposing this
> plan, which was part of the reason it's never been finished.

My understanding is that Jan insisted on the script matching
emacs' formatting, but as long as that's done he won't object.
(come to think of it, that may have been private email after the
main discussion died down)

It's a shame that emacs doesn't support the "official extension
language of GNU", otherwise we could just use their .elisp
indentation directly.  :(

> Rietveld doesn't prevent multiple patches per issue.  Our policy of
> testing each commit to ensure that it doesn't break build prevents
> multiple patches per issue.

I thought that rietveld automatically squashed all patches into a
single large diff -- which I agree isn't precisely the same as
"preventing" multiple patches, but it doesn't precisely "support"
them either.  :)

- Graham