On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 10:45:42AM -0400, Damien Riegel wrote:
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 08:26:30PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> > The patch has quite a history, and is duly controversial.  Many people
> > say they can't use Mutt without it, while others don't want it anywhere
> > near their screen.  I can understand the latter group's feelings, so
> > first let me note that Rich has made it a compile-time configurable
> > option, defaulting off.
> 
> Okay, fine to make it compile-time configurable, but mutt should really
> stop cluttering its source files with more #ifdef. The first patch adds
> 69 times "#ifdef USE_SIDEBAR" to various source files.

Some of that will be alleviated by the cleanup afterwards in the buffy
code.

I'll look into possible stubbing and not ifdef'ing the include file.
Other areas I'd rather keep separate for now.

> The serie is split in a strange way. Basically it's one feature patch
> (that btw I can't apply to tip) and 7 fixups.

The attachment to patch 01 applies cleanly for me.  The github link was
rebased against upstream on April 20th, so naturally may require some
rebasing/adjustment.

> Can't it be reorganized in more logical commits? add new features to
> buffy, add new mailbox operation to update buffy, add sidebar view,
> etc.

For features being developed normally, of course this would be the right
way to go about it.  This patch is a special case, having been around
for so long, and already bundled together.  I debated doing it in that
order, but I don't want to merely reorganize the patch, I needed to make
some fixes too.  In the end I decided it would be easier to gulp it down
and then fix it.  Of course, I could squash-merge the series, but I
thought it would be easier for Rich to see my changes if I started from
his patch.

As far as reviewing it, I have been doing just that the past week.
There are some issues with the new buffy code, but that is the next
thing I will tackle.  So you can think of the series and next few
commits as deconstructing the patch rather than constructing it.

-- 
Kevin J. McCarthy
GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C  5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to