* 74 columns for ChangeLogs? [was Re: [PATCH 1/6] gdbserver (linux_debug): Remove extraneous \n from output.]
@ 2013-12-18 17:28 Doug Evans
2013-12-18 17:43 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Doug Evans @ 2013-12-18 17:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:13 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 12/17/2013 09:40 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
>> 2013-12-17 Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
>>
>> * nat/linux-waitpid.c (linux_debug): Remove extraneous \n from output.
>
> (Line too long. fill-column is 74 for ChangeLogs)
Is that a hard and fast rule now, or just a nice to have.
I always understood it to be a nice-to-have:
I don't have to look very far into ChangeLog to find a plethora of
violations from various people, and I know I didn't review all those
patches.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: 74 columns for ChangeLogs? [was Re: [PATCH 1/6] gdbserver (linux_debug): Remove extraneous \n from output.]
2013-12-18 17:28 74 columns for ChangeLogs? [was Re: [PATCH 1/6] gdbserver (linux_debug): Remove extraneous \n from output.] Doug Evans
@ 2013-12-18 17:43 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2013-12-18 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Doug Evans; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/18/2013 05:28 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:13 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 12/17/2013 09:40 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
>>> 2013-12-17 Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
>>>
>>> * nat/linux-waitpid.c (linux_debug): Remove extraneous \n from output.
>>
>> (Line too long. fill-column is 74 for ChangeLogs)
>
> Is that a hard and fast rule now, or just a nice to have.
It's not a new rule. It's been that way since forever.
It's emacs's default in changelog mode, and also what most
ChangeLog files in the tree have explicitly at the bottom:
fill-column: 74
So M-q in ChangeLog should be doing that for you automatically.
And also mentioned in the ContributionCheckist wiki page.
> I always understood it to be a nice-to-have:
> I don't have to look very far into ChangeLog to find a plethora of
> violations from various people, and I know I didn't review all those
> patches.
Sure, bugs and wrong formatting always pass through review all
the time. What's the point? Honestly, I was just expecting
you'd say something like "whoops, forgot to M-q", but it
sounds like you did it on purpose. This was already discussed
not so long ago, and I didn't mean to open yet another discussion,
so I'm already regretting I pointed it out.
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-12-18 17:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-12-18 17:28 74 columns for ChangeLogs? [was Re: [PATCH 1/6] gdbserver (linux_debug): Remove extraneous \n from output.] Doug Evans
2013-12-18 17:43 ` Pedro Alves
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox