Re: [PATCH] whitespace: reorganize initial-indent check

Wincent Colaiuta [off-list ref] writes:

El 16/12/2007, a las 4:48, J. Bruce Fields escribi󺊊> Reorganize to emphasize the most complicated part of the code (the tab

quoted

case).

Any chance of either squashing this series into one patch seeing as  
its all churning over the same part of the code, or resending it with  
numbering? The patches seemed to arrive out of order in my mailbox and  
I don't really know what order they're supposed to be applied in and  
it's a bit hard to review.

I do not think squashing is necessary or a good idea in this case.  As
far as I can tell, the series does not have "oops, this fixes the
earlier problem I introduced in the series", but it is purely a logical
progression.  The first one fixes a bug introduced by the 0-base
conversion which can and should stand on its own.

The mails were properly threaded with in-reply-to so numbering is not
strictly necessary either, but would have helped readers with MUA that
do not pay attention to that header.

I already see JBF resent the series, which is very nice of him.