On Fri, 2013-06-28 at 11:30 -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > Hey Chandra, > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 05:25:08PM -0500, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > In preparation for combined pquota/gquota support, do some > > whitespace cleanups. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Wow. Putting this in a patch by itself really puts it into stark > relief. > > If we pull this in we're representing that some tabs and the alignment > of the fields is more valuable than the comments? I'm fairly certain I If you put it that way, it does sound not correct, and I would agree with you too :). But, IMO, it has to be more subjective than that. The comments removed, IMO, add no additional value (the field name conveys the same information). You can see that I left alone the comments that provide some value. > don't agree that's the case... > > I'm sorry for your trouble, but I think I should pass on this one. Do > you agree? > In effect, the code does look better (than I found it :) at the cost of removal of redundant comments. If you still don't want to include, I would accept your decision. > Thanks, > Ben > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
