From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Thompson, David" Subject: Re: 'origin' indentation rule. Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:09:56 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87twr2neyu.fsf@openmailbox.org> <87zj0sc29c.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50701) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZaRpp-0007B5-CC for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:10:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZaRpl-0004P3-6g for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:10:01 -0400 Received: from mail-yk0-f170.google.com ([209.85.160.170]:33389) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZaRpl-0004Ni-2V for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:09:57 -0400 Received: by ykei199 with SMTP id i199so97694445yke.0 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:09:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87zj0sc29c.fsf@gnu.org> 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: =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: guix-devel On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > Hello! > > Mathieu Lirzin skribis: > >> 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. > > I don=E2=80=99t think it was discussed at the time. It=E2=80=99s just th= at I like > =E2=80=98package=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98origin=E2=80=99 indented like =E2= =80=98begin=E2=80=99, I think it=E2=80=99s more pleasant > to the eye. :-) > >> 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. > > It=E2=80=99s a good idea to have the manual conform to the rule. > > Other than that, I think it=E2=80=99s no big deal if some packages don=E2= =80=99t follow > exactly this rule. I encourage people to follow this rule, but I prefer > a patch that violates it than no patch at all. I guess it=E2=80=99s abou= t > finding the right balance between nitpicking and welcoming. ;-) > > Importers render code with (ice-9 pretty-print), which is quite > primitive, so they cannot follow sophisticated rules. > > So apart from the manual, I wouldn=E2=80=99t change anything. > What do people think? Sounds fine to me. It's best to be consistent, but this isn't a big deal. - Dave