Stefan Beller [off-list ref] writes:
But as these follow up changes heavily rely on the very first patch
I will first try to get that right, meaning accepted into pu.
Then I can send patches with these proposals such as making more
functions.
I think it's better to get the style right before, to avoid doubling the
review effort (review a hard-to-review patch first, and then re-review a
style-fix one).
--
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
Am 21.08.2013 15:07, schrieb Matthieu Moy:
Stefan Beller [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
But as these follow up changes heavily rely on the very first patch
I will first try to get that right, meaning accepted into pu.
Then I can send patches with these proposals such as making more
functions.
I think it's better to get the style right before, to avoid doubling the
review effort (review a hard-to-review patch first, and then re-review a
style-fix one).
If by "style fix" you mean "coding style fix", I agree.
But, IMO, refactoring the long function can wait because the long function
is easier to compare to the shell script, and I think that is more
important later when you need to dig the history.
It is already too late to save review effort.
-- Hannes