From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: on indentation Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 14:15:56 +0200 Message-ID: <87zhmjoxhf.fsf@elephly.net> References: <87d0jgq6pc.fsf@elephly.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59178) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hc7bL-0001Eu-Qj for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 08:16:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hc7bK-00037J-Sn for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 08:16:07 -0400 Received: from sender4-of-o53.zoho.com ([136.143.188.53]:21375) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hc7bK-000367-EI for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 08:16:06 -0400 In-reply-to: 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" To: Robert Vollmert Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Robert Vollmert writes: > [ missed the list cc previously ] > >> On 14. Jun 2019, at 21:59, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: >>> * I can run etc/indent-code.el by hand from the guix source >>> repo, but it would be much nicer to have it available as a >>> regular executable. >>=20 >> I would not package it. Isn=E2=80=99t it already usable as an executabl= e? It >> is a regular script after all. > > Well here it starts with #!/usr/bin/emacs --script. And guix environment = guix > doesn=E2=80=99t provide emacs. It felt like the right way around that wou= ld be to > package it, but perhaps adding emacs to the environment and change > the shebang to /usr/bin/env emacs would be a good change then? The shebang is a placeholder. When you run the configure script the placeholder is replaced with whatever =E2=80=9Cemacs=E2=80=9D was detected. >> Some existing code, however, may predate our indentation refinements, >> and yet other parts may have been overlooked. When we touch those >> sections anyway we may also adjust the indentation, but making purely >> cosmetic commits is discouraged. > > I=E2=80=99m curious, why is that discouraged? In my experience for this k= ind of > formatting issue, the best approach is to get it over with once and for a= ll > and enforce the standards from that point. It makes for bad git logs and limits the usefulness of =E2=80=9Cgit blame= =E2=80=9D. --=20 Ricardo