Page MenuHomePhabricator

ecore_main.c: Refactor purely duplicate ecore_main_fd_handler_file_add()
ClosedPublic

Authored by c on Apr 7 2015, 6:12 PM.

Details

Summary

... to simply invoke _ecore_main_fd_handler_add(). The only difference appears to be the former sets ->file to EINA_TRUE. So, we add that as a parameter.

You can consider this patch, and any other contributions I make to enlightenment, to be under the terms of whatever open source license governs that particular project, or at your option, the MIT license. Basically, if I'm uploading patches here, it's because I want them to be useful.

Test Plan

Should be pretty straightforward. I am in the process of doing a compile check.

Diff Detail

Repository
rEFL core/efl
Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Unit Tests Skipped
c updated this revision to Diff 5276.Apr 7 2015, 6:12 PM
c retitled this revision from to ecore_main.c: Refactor purely duplicate ecore_main_fd_handler_file_add().
c updated this object.
c edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)
c added a project: efl.
c changed the visibility from "All Users" to "Public (No Login Required)".
c added a reviewer: efl.
c updated this revision to Diff 5280.Apr 7 2015, 7:39 PM

Missed the header definition — did not expect a function with underscore-prefix to be exposed outside of the CU. Fixed.

jpeg edited reviewers, added: jpeg; removed: efl.Apr 7 2015, 8:11 PM
jpeg edited edge metadata.Apr 7 2015, 8:20 PM
jpeg added a subscriber: zmike.

Hey Conrad. Thanks for your patches.

You can consider this patch, and any other contributions I make to enlightenment, to be under the terms of whatever open source license governs that particular project, or at your option, the MIT license. Basically, if I'm uploading patches here, it's because I want them to be useful.

@zmike complained about the lack of proper authorship in the commit. The problem is not about the license, because as soon as you submit a patch for EFL, you implicitely agree that the patch will have the same license as the code surrounding it (be it BSD, LGPL, etc...).

Instead, we dislike the lack of authorship. Your name gets lost. And this actually adds burden to us reviewers as we need to manually amend the commit to add your name. Otherwise git log will show patches that were authored by someone else under our name (not a huge deal, but it actually matters to some of us). Please configure git in your EFL/Elm/E repos:

git config --local --add user.email cse.cem@gmail.com
git config --local --add user.name "Conrad Meyer"

Finally, please don't put "efl" as a reviewer. If you don't know, put no one, and let the patch go to the "Needs Triage" list. We'll deal with it. Otherwise use git blame or git log to find out who might be knowledgeable about this piece of code.

jpeg closed this revision.Apr 7 2015, 11:49 PM
jpeg updated this revision to Diff 5282.

Closed by commit rEFL9281fb553754 (authored by @c, committed by @jpeg).

c added a comment.Apr 8 2015, 5:48 AM
In D2302#8, @jpeg wrote:

Instead, we dislike the lack of authorship. Your name gets lost. And this actually adds burden to us reviewers as we need to manually amend the commit to add your name. Otherwise git log will show patches that were authored by someone else under our name (not a huge deal, but it actually matters to some of us). Please configure git in your EFL/Elm/E repos:

You want a git format-patch, got it.

Finally, please don't put "efl" as a reviewer. If you don't know, put no one, and let the patch go to the "Needs Triage" list. We'll deal with it. Otherwise use git blame or git log to find out who might be knowledgeable about this piece of code.

Got it, thanks. I used git blame but didn't see consistent authorship for that file.