Re: FSFE-defined coding standards?

2021-02-11 Thread kreyren
On 2/10/21 12:39 PM, Eike Rathke wrote:
> there's no incentive to even follow a discussion.

Agree that's why i want to define these standards through FSFE in a way 
that allows public review and contributions ^-^

-- 
- Krey



OpenPGP_0x31AE4020956E0A9A.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


OpenPGP_signature
Description: PGP signature
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct


Re: FSFE-defined coding standards?

2021-02-11 Thread kreyren
On 2/10/21 1:10 PM, Alessandro Rubini wrote:
> everybody is
> already doing that

I don't believe that more standards are a bad thing.

 > Some coding standard make no sense, some are ugly, some are good; you 
only need to choose yours -- or be forced by your employer.

Agree that some or even majority of them doesn't make any sense and are 
terrible in general thus this proposal to develop them as a set of 
multiple standards instead of one huge standard to allow developers to 
cherry-pick the one they want to follow and discuss them for their projects.

-- 
- Krey



OpenPGP_0x31AE4020956E0A9A.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


OpenPGP_signature
Description: PGP signature
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct