On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 16:10:05 -0800
Eric Pruitt <eric.pruitt_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Eric,
> Although I think sticking to a specific style going forward is
> reasonable (even if I'm not fond of all of the recommendations of
> style(9)), I don't think refactoring the existing dwm codebase purely
> for style is a good idea. When I looked at the patches, the first thing
> that came to my mind is "All my dwm patches are going to break because
> they can no longer be cleanly applied." Customization-by-patching is a
> very popular strategy with dwm users, and I'm sure there are tons of
> other people this change would also inconvenience.
I hope you saw these patches are for dmenu, not dwm. However, your
arguments still apply because there is a small set of patches for dmenu.
Still, for the sake of preserving compatibility with existing patches,
you wouldn't be able to change anything in the codebase without breaking
one. You can't just bring the project to a standstill as soon as a given
number of patches has been written for it.
The style(9)-changes were absolutely necessary and it's better to do this
as early as possible instead of waiting and waiting until it's too late
and you have a really big number of patches for a given program.
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Tue Dec 23 2014 - 10:28:40 CET