From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:34928) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gjiub-00021H-BN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 05:59:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gjiua-0002W4-As for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 05:59:09 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52560) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gjiuZ-0002Nm-CV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 05:59:08 -0500 References: <1547196148-12250-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com> From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: <552ac2db-6568-18f8-5397-a00c4b432df9@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:58:56 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] HACKING vs. CODING_STYLE (was: Re: [PATCH] HACKING: Clarify the paragraph about typedefs) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, Markus Armbruster , =?UTF-8?Q?C=c3=a9dric_Le_Goater?= , Greg Kurz , Eric Blake , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Stefan Hajnoczi On 2019-01-11 11:38, Paolo Bonzini wrote: [...] > And, I would move it to CODING_STYLE since we are at it. :) I just got some feedback in IRC already, and seems like I am not alone, so let's discuss it here on the mailing list, too: What's the exact difference between CODING_STYLE and HACKING? Some of the paragraphs in HACKING sound rather mandatory and coding-style related, too... Should we maybe merge the two files into one (e.g. called "CODING")? Thomas