Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[James Simmons]

> On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 17:34 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > A: Top-posting.
> > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> > 
> > A: No.
> > Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
> > 
> > http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> > 
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 02:42:29PM +0000, Ben Evans wrote:
> > > This was done to conform to the Lustre Coding Guidelines.
> > 
> > What is this mythical guidelines, and why does it differ from the kernel
> > source ones?
> 
> It's not like it's hard to find
> http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Coding_Style_Guidelines
> 
> And in specific:
> http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Style_Guide_Includes
> 
> There is no single mandated code style for this.
> Some people like reverse christmas tree.
> 
> Whatever...
> 

Sigh, Sayre's law. I went looking to see what the offical
policy is for this and found nothing. If this is really 
important can we then place an offical policy on how
headers are added to a C file in CodingStyle and add
something to checkpatch to detect incorrect patches.
Lets burn down this bike shed once and for all.