On 2013-02-25 09:11:27 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
> > True, but I'm with Heikki: it's a pedantic and unhelpful guideline.
>
> Then let's change it, drop the preference, and update the documentation.
+1
> > Everyone here who reviews patches regularly knows how to, and probably
> > does, convert between those formats with regularity. Making patch
> > submitters feel badly because they've used the "wrong" format does not
> > advance the goals of the project.
>
> For my part, I'd rather put the onus on the submitter to submit a
> readable patch in the first part than ask the reviewer and anyone else
> interested in looking at the patch to fix it. That's even more true
> when you consider the archives and reading patches through the web
> interface (though downloading the original mail message has gotten
> better with the new archive code).
Well, the point is that you cannot satisfy enough people with either
choice anyway. I for one feel much more comfortable sending patches in a
format that I can actually read without thinking too much. Which is the
case for unified but definitely not for context. But its different for
others.
I gave in and made my mailreader convert all patches to unified for
reading, that way I don't care about other peoples preferences for one.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services
