On 10/10/2015 02:37 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 14:25:28 +0200 > hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> On 10/10/2015 02:24 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: >>> On 10-10-2015 14:19:44 +0200, hasufell wrote: >>>>> +RDEPEND=" >>>>> + !libressl? ( dev-libs/openssl:0 ) >>>>> + libressl? ( dev-libs/libressl ) >>>>> + sys-libs/zlib >>>>> + net-libs/http-parser >>>> >>>> Please order deps alphabetically (I know I added libressl without >>>> reordering, but that was just to keep the diff as small as >>>> possible). >>> >>> Is this a policy >> >> It is undocumented policy. > > > It is useless style nitpick. Go maintain the whole tree if you want your > style to be the only true one :) >
It's not my style, it was taught by my recruiters/mentors. > Sometimes it is indeed better to sort alphabetically, sometimes > upstream's configure.ac/CMakeLists.txt/whatever ordering is better. > Whatever minimizes chances of missing a dep change on version bump and > accommodates best maintainer is policy... > I agree, this can be skipped during reviews.
