cvs commit: src/sys/netinet6 frag6.c icmp6.c in6.c in6_ifattach.c in6_pcb.c in6_proto.c in6_rmx.c in6_src.c ip6_input.c ip6_mroute.c ip6_output.c mld6.c nd6.c nd6_nbr.c nd6_rtr.c raw_ip6.c udp6_usrreq.c

[Sam Leffler]

David O'Brien wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 10:31:49PM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
>   
>> 2) merge conflicts cause everybody pain.  It is no fun getting 100 conflicts
>> because somebody just did a de-__P() sweep.
>>
>> Having said that, we have grown overly sensitive to both 1) and 2).
>>     
>
> I agree.  We seem to have become overly sensitive (and grown some
> assumption of some "rules")
>
> I note I did not complain when sys/agp was gratitiously renamed to
> sys/dev/agp from sys/pci.  I had local changes that I had to move to new
> files and fixup afterwards.  I didn't complain.. maybe I should have?
> What feature did that rename give?  Nothing - just a "style" change.
>
>
>   
>> For what its worth, I'm glad it was cleaned up.
>>     
>
> Its funny the amount of concern being generated over something that
> everyone that has said something says they are happy with. :-)
>
>   

The flip side of this is that I just tried to resolve some compile 
issues with netstat in the RELENG_7 branch and diff's against HEAD hit 
all the gratuitous "style changes" you recently made.

I believe changes like this are fine when actively working in a 
particular area of code; but all this "knob polishing" is more likely to 
introduce bugs than improve the state of the code.  If this is a 
precursor to you pitching in to improve the ipv6 code then great.

I observe that netbsd does these sorts of changes in sweeps over the 
tree and w/ multiple people involved to review each other's work.  I'd 
be more confident if I saw commits like this include a "Reviewed by:" line.

    Sam