about that line width...

This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.

A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.

Neels Hofmeyr nhofmeyr at sysmocom.de
Tue Dec 12 13:04:26 UTC 2017


Hi all developers,

I'd like to briefly review the decision for 120 chars line width we've
taken some time ago. To make this clear, I don't want us to re-raise this
issue on a weekly basis. But let's recap on what 120 has brought us?

I know of three developers not finding 120 chars appropriate.

One of them is me, I still think more than 80 would help a lot and remove
the cumbersome need for wrapping lines in many places, but I would prefer
100 chars to 120. I end up getting wrapped lines and have to enlarge
terminals such that only one fits on the screen at my preferred font size.
I used to easily have two.

One objective argument against 120 is the gerrit website: scrolling
left/right there is annoying, because for once there is the overall page
scroll left/right if the window doesn't have enough space (on smaller
screens), and then there's the side-scroll in the individual columns in
the side-by-side view. So UI wise it is beneficial to minimize the need to
scroll on the gerrit website.

For some time I have actually set my local line wrap to 105 and submitted
a number of patches like that, but recently decided it's stupid if each of
us chooses their own favorite, and set it to 120; hence the mail.

My guess is that I'm not the only one who picked his own local favorite,
and if that is so we might as well re-assess the common average favorite,
so that we can all use & enforce the same width.

In case we change this again: about the lines already merged in 120 width,
I wouldn't want us to edit them and just live with a few 120 wide lines
here and there.

What do you guys think?
Would it make sense to have a "pick your favorite <= 120" rule?
Rather re-negotiate one common width? Keep it at 120?

~N
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/openbsc/attachments/20171212/922feee2/attachment.bin>


More information about the OpenBSC mailing list