test_source harmful?

[Robert Collins]

On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 10:20 +0200, Marius Kruger wrote:
> 2009/2/27 Robert Collins <robert.collins at canonical.com>:
> > On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 11:37 +0200, Marius Kruger wrote:
> >> 2009/2/25 Robert Collins <robert.collins at canonical.com>:
> >> >> I thought that was the point: to put the pain of fixing whitespace
> >> >> mistakes squarely where they belong, at the point of the person
> >> >> attempting to introduce them.
> >> yes, don't allow new ones to be added.
> >
> > Or we could just not worry.
> 
> then that needs to be the policy: diffs adding/removing trailing in
> code you touch is welcome. i.e. reviewer should not even mention
> the trailing whitespace since it is a non issue.

I don't think policy has to be all-or-none. We can say we prefer not to
have trailing whitespace without using a hammer to enforce it.

> but ok, I get the point. remove it. I would even send the patch in but I
> won't have time this weekend (I'm going hiking).
> Things to note though:
> * maybe you don't want to remove the whole test, just the trailing
> whitespace part.
>   because we used to check for the existence of tabs,
>   and we have always complied to some of the other stuff eg. a newline
> at the end of files, and the line-endings.
> * update the relevant sections in hacking.

tabs can lead to bugs - I definitely like keeping the tab check. I'm
with Martin - keeping those things would be nice. 

I don't think the policy needs changing per se.

-Rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20090302/7179df2b/attachment.pgp