[gentoo-dev] Code review and main tree inclusion for java-mvn-src.eclass and java-pkg-simple.eclass

[gentoo-dev] Code review and main tree inclusion for java-mvn-src.eclass and java-pkg-simple.eclass

[Andrey Kislyuk]

Hi everyone,

I would like to commit a package to the main tree whose dependencies
include the freehep-* libraries from the java-experimental overlay.
Those in turn depend on java-mvn-src.eclass, which depends on
java-pkg-simple.eclass, both written by mvg.

So, I'd like to have these committed to the main tree, which means we
need a code review. Please see here:

http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/java/browser/java-experimental/eclass

... and let's say after 30 days from this email pending resolution of
any complaints mvg and I will push these to main tree.

-ak

[gentoo-dev] Re: Code review and main tree inclusion for java-mvn-src.eclass and java-pkg-simple.eclass

[Christian Faulhammer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 567 bytes --]

Hi,

Andrey Kislyuk <weaver@gentoo.org>:
> ... and let's say after 30 days from this email pending resolution of
> any complaints mvg and I will push these to main tree.

 You should review your docstrings.  Some of them contain overlong
sentences, which are hard to grasp.

java-pkg-simple:
In my eyes, defining all local variables at the beginning of a function
makes it easier to read.

V-Li

-- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Code review and main tree inclusion for java-mvn-src.eclass and java-pkg-simple.eclass

[Christian Faulhammer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 779 bytes --]

Hi,

Martin von Gagern <Martin.vGagern@gmx.net>:

> Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> > java-pkg-simple:
> > In my eyes, defining all local variables at the beginning of a
> > function makes it easier to read.
> 
> Sorry, Fauli, i totally missed your mail as it was only addressed to
> gentoo-dev, while I've been intently watching gentoo-java...

 I am not subscribed to that list, so my mail would not get through.

> To sum things up: yes, I could change the local declarations, but I'd
> rather keep things as they are, unless you object more vehemently.

 No problem, it was a matter of style.

V-Li

-- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]