[Libvir] Questions about the future of libvirt

[Daniel Veillard]

On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 02:54:11PM +0100, David Anderson wrote:
> Okay. But what about the code reformatting? Even if we don't define a
> large internal API mechanism, the current code still needs a uniform
> coding style, calling conventions etc. Are you okay to let me do that?

 I'm not fond of GNU style which you suggested. I use

paphio:~ -> cat ~/bin/cb
#!/bin/sh
indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l75 -lc75 -nut -sbi4 -psl -saf -sai -saw -sbi4 -ss -sc -cdw -cli4 -npcs -nbc

I asked a couple of time, and since I'm likely to be the one maintaining the
code in the long term, I would rather stick to what I'm most used to.

For calling conventions what do you refer to ?
Even if we don't do things right now, it's fine listing relatively precisely
what you would like to get changed, the first patch could be against CVS' TODO
to just list those, that would be an useful first step.

> Just so that we can then start working on new implementations on a
> single, unified codebase, rather than two codebases fused together
> :-).

IMHO indenting is peanuts, it's one ":1,$ !cb" per file. I didn't want to change
Anthony's code at that level because I expect him to have patches floating
around for the XML-RPC and I would rather reindent after applying his patches
than painfully (him or I) go though the merge after a reindentation has
occured.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat http://redhat.com/
veillard at redhat.com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/