20/07/2017 10:56, Jens Freimann: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 06:23:21PM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: > >On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 05:24:38PM +0800, Van Haaren, Harry wrote: > [...] > >> Hi Tiwei, > >> > >> Although the idea and motivation for code-cleanup are good, performing > >> large cleanup across a code-base is not a good solution. The reason that > >> these types of cleanups (or even re-formatting the entire codebase) are not > >> performed often is that it "invalidates" any currently-in-progress > >> patch-sets. > >> As a result, more work is required from many contributors to rebase useful > >> features due to across-the-board white-space cleanups. > >> > >> Just expressing concern that we need to think carefully about the impacts > >> of such a patch. > >> > > > >Yeah, I agree. Such patch may cause many conflicts. But this patch > >is almost generated automatically, that is to say, it's a quick work. > >And it's more like some fixes (for the bad coding style) rather than > >silly re-formatting done by `indent'. So I just want to share it with > >the community, and see the potential feedbacks. Thank you for your > >comments! :) > > what I'm more concerned about with these kind of huge clean-ups is > that it makes git-blame less useful for me. Next time I want to look > up who changed this line I'll just find your cleanup patch. Then I have > to do another step to find out which commit introduced the change I'm > looking for. > > I'm more for cleaning up these things next time you do a semantic > change in this code.
+1 for doing clean-up when refactoring code
