From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <thomas@monjalon.net> Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D330E7CDF for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sun, 4 Jun 2017 12:26:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85EA720B50; Sun, 4 Jun 2017 06:26:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 04 Jun 2017 06:26:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=ecI5Hcx/6/fR5Y+ kAFm9r48D/iBqN0PJw65uRXGcVBk=; b=CWWgXYuf57++D7QiSUsAuMECbqeQiGy ylNgLbAUh7HSKZe6dW74FkwpZ/16sH0at3JUvDu74fL13f9D4+iwWbIVCv+XiLbY tputosMmOb+C3WQg5SDzpZaUvP+yg1BxW9UIlg4j079Aob4VmeA1EWxzmQ9errbu orzRINYoxuU8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=ecI5Hcx/6/fR5Y+kAFm9r48D/iBqN0PJw65uRXGcVBk=; b=qVrBfqs5 PPk+Vls51hVytJXIrvmyczXM4HcxC550zr1/idBS4hN12kO1jwWFnJ+G/DPYEt/e 5cJOd8hFvzYhUyqurIv1lCTMNyFJwLu8SA1YYqeXrLGA6sWUqpYBWULO49b3hr2z gOz30EWU9Bz/YrJ3aRF7yUP0aY9Axeqxwt1tgTMr1AqePSzRDhZZSuOX4aq3bwBc HF5mC4ajfOXgOFukDetU3cnm4iMLbykLcDiqNMo7mmeJjGvYaZxGDGk76utP7Bpm laihaM0j7bxSGaOBTSiFpwYO+e2qkIxEapU82RNylEWwQkWgrn7nhWGagAJM0vwE HO/8oqmDv1oKug== X-ME-Sender: <xms:aOAzWVutRZlQxPwu1E99vXPgTO5FJorUuImmcK4IEd3CeX2wK5DasQ> X-Sasl-enc: NqzSgwkB4rsCP0TXJqpxdJDo9AizETle6QiRFb7lAg8R 1496572008 Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3B4A12475C; Sun, 4 Jun 2017 06:26:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> To: "Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com> Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>, "Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com> Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2017 12:26:47 +0200 Message-ID: <3151665.10RMzPgsok@xps> In-Reply-To: <20170522064424.GO2276@yliu-dev> References: <1494511780-5732-1-git-send-email-john.mcnamara@intel.com> <B27915DBBA3421428155699D51E4CFE2332E0E49@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com> <20170522064424.GO2276@yliu-dev> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] doc: change doc line length limit in contributors guide X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2017 10:26:49 -0000 22/05/2017 08:44, Yuanhan Liu: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 02:20:58PM +0000, Mcnamara, John wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > > Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 10:24 AM > > > ,,, > > > > > > > The current DPDK "single sentence per line plus wrap at ~120 characters" > > > > guideline is unusual, not supported by editors and, with rare > > > > exceptions, not followed by anyone. > > > > > > > > As such I think the guidelines should reflect how people actually > > > > write docs and submit patches, which is wrapping at 80 characters. > > > > > > I am OK with 80 characters. > > > However, I think we should keep trying to explain that it is better to > > > wrap at the end of a sentence. > > > > > > Example: > > > This long sentence with a lot of words which does not mean anything will > > > wrap at 80 characters and continue on the second line. Then a new sentence > > > starts and ends on the third line. > > > > > > It would be better like that: > > > This long sentence with a lot of words which does not mean anything will > > > wrap at 80 characters and continue on the second line. > > > Then a new sentence starts and ends on the third line. > > > > This is essentially the same problem as the current guideline: that this > > is an artificial way of writing text, it isn't supported by editors, > > and is unlikely to be followed in practice. > > > > The first example is the way people write text and the way text is submitted > > in patches so the guidelines should reflect this. > > +1 for the first one :) > > And, > > Reviewed-by: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> I disagree but I have applied it ;) (with the fix from Shreyansh)