On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 12:47:23PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Then that's probably largely my fault. Sorry. So somehow we > unconsciously arrived at some status quo, but how can that be > taken for a guideline or policy?
The policy element here is "we do not need to follow emacs blindly". As Reinhold just pointed out, the GNU policy explicitly says "don't follow this blindly"! If we have a discussion and decide that emacs is the best code formatter, in terms of both the output code and ease-of-use, then by all means let's officially adopt emacs as our (new?) policy. (regardless of whether this is "new" or "old") If we have a discussion and decide that style is the best code formatter, in terms of both output code and ease-of-use, then let's officially adopt astyle (plus pre-processor) as our new policy. I do not think that we are "being unfaithful" to GNU if we ended up adopting astyle. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
