From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mathieu Lirzin Subject: 'origin' indentation rule. Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 23:26:17 +0200 Message-ID: <87twr2neyu.fsf@openmailbox.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51371) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Za9Ml-0001MT-5O for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 17:26:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Za9Mi-0005Vy-0P for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 17:26:47 -0400 Received: from smtp16.openmailbox.org ([62.4.1.50]:46872) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Za9Mh-0005VH-NU for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 17:26:43 -0400 List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi, While reviewing patches I got confused when I discovered that indentation for 'origin' is not consistent in package definitions. Since commit 35ef3633001b05c25324c6e5a69d635ddc62cb6d, which add (eval . (put 'origin 'scheme-indent-function 0)) In .dir-locals.el, it seems that there has been quite a lot of commits since then that don't use this rule. Even in the manual the "suggested" way is not clear since for example "doc/package-hello.scm" uses the rule, but (info "(guix)Defining Packages") doesn't. I failed to retrieve the post where this rule has been suggested (if there is one), so I don't know the rationale behind it. My personnal opinion is that for the sake of simplicity and column saving we should remove it. But Whatever the final decision is, I think it's important to be consistent at least in the manual and the importers. -- Mathieu Lirzin