From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5052E1F5AE for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 18:16:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726756AbgG2SQw (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2020 14:16:52 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:51639 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726385AbgG2SQw (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2020 14:16:52 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D991E3BFB; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 14:16:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=TEbv0QPsKY08CliaUOMoJTmJoVs=; b=HBOqPR E2GY4UItGZ8Soo6LpEDZBnzwrXSoNqIy6DJwfAeWNIRjv61fyMcMsNkq/dNd1T3E Ok2SlazTS6YMOYQ6gSRYhz71+mhknjrE9ilyvozpSnKqyDyFuzx8PnkAnFwKIK+6 lr9GAGIUEqLJbz9RfNLZYBzXRBO2fie3LRTvg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=UiC8spL1SOCNeKn8I81DDhC7B3J0WUXq KDtLS5Oyg0wII/U23ewqlvEdj+RHUQX9T7U05ICJYLGl0oxBhy4+8AkgfcAUqD2S UXIAk8uNrgHBo13dHrmje9OkPZIi9dzllDvz2mtKqPPawNobdc5nqf/FroHzKI1G Znj1NBM9efA= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85712E3BFA; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 14:16:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BAE7DE3BF7; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 14:16:47 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Steve Kemp via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Steve Kemp Subject: Re: [PATCH] comment: fix spelling mistakes inside comments References: <571792b3-e65b-e6e8-34b9-56a87a47de8d@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 11:16:46 -0700 In-Reply-To: <571792b3-e65b-e6e8-34b9-56a87a47de8d@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee's message of "Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:45:21 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AA85CD2C-D1C7-11EA-92E0-F0EA2EB3C613-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Derrick Stolee writes: > I'll leave it to more experienced contributors to comment on how a > comment-only patch fits with this section Documentation/CodingGuidelines: > > - Fixing style violations while working on a real change as a > preparatory clean-up step is good, but otherwise avoid useless code > churn for the sake of conforming to the style. > > In my opinion, this change is not harmful, but also isn't super > necessary. I could go either way. Typofixes in comments has no chance of breaking things than a carelessly done code churn made in the name of cleaning up, so cost-benefit comparison is much more favourable. I'm sure that I won't be exhausted after reviewing comment-only patch as much as after reviewing code-churn only patch.