From 66e1cf12a355bd04ea97a7830b6cd35c8871907e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Carl Baldwin Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 21:04:39 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Clarify with example mentioning gratuitous whitespace changes Maybe I'm just too picky but I usually call this stuff out in reviews even if I decide to +2 the patch set. Change-Id: I5a2667d44203147e112f5a1d7573105478d805f7 --- doc/source/devref/effective_neutron.rst | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/doc/source/devref/effective_neutron.rst b/doc/source/devref/effective_neutron.rst index 053d2712c..01ebd1631 100644 --- a/doc/source/devref/effective_neutron.rst +++ b/doc/source/devref/effective_neutron.rst @@ -230,7 +230,9 @@ Scoping your patch appropriately * Do not make multiple changes in one patch unless absolutely necessary. Cleaning up nearby functions or fixing a small bug you noticed while working on something else makes the patch very difficult to review. It also makes - cherry-picking and reverting very difficult. + cherry-picking and reverting very difficult. Even apparently minor changes + such as reformatting whitespace around your change can burden reviewers and + cause merge conflicts. * If a fix or feature requires code refactoring, submit the refactoring as a separate patch than the one that changes the logic. Otherwise it's difficult for a reviewer to tell the difference between mistakes -- 2.45.2