What
Roll out the ecosystem's proposed code-style policy to this repo, the second pilot after
OCCTSwiftScripts (#114 /
#115), replicating that pattern
exactly.
Proposal doc: ecosystem docs/code-style-policy-proposal-2026-08.md
This repo's facts
- ~699 Swift lines across ~6 files:
Sources/SwiftJWW/JWW.swift, DXFWriter.swift,
Reader.swift, Sources/jww2dxf/main.swift, Tests/SwiftJWWTests/SwiftJWWTests.swift. Very
small: full sweep, trivially so. No exemption manifest needed.
- Zero first-party C++ bridge files, confirmed. No
clang-format needed.
- Already has 6 mandatory OKF policies onboarded (
okf/policies/). This adds a 7th.
- No existing
.github/workflows/ CI today. This bootstraps CI from nothing.
Scope for this repo
.swift-format (100 col, 4-space, copied verbatim from OCCTSwiftScripts) plus a full
swift-format --in-place sweep of Sources/ and Tests/.
.swiftlint.yml, scoped to only_rules: [orphaned_doc_comment] (same reasoning as
OCCTSwiftScripts: SwiftLint's default rule set fights swift-format's formatting opinions and
overlaps the ecosystem's own code-structure policy on complexity).
Scripts/comment-ratio-check.sh: report-only nudge (never fails), bash to match this repo's
own tooling convention.
.github/workflows/code-style.yml: swift-format lint --strict and swiftlint lint --strict
as blocking gates, comment-ratio as a non-blocking step.
okf/policies/code-style.md, linked from okf/index.md, this repo's 7th mandatory policy.
- Hand-fix every remaining
swift-format lint --strict / swiftlint lint --strict finding after
the automatic sweep, the same way OCCTSwiftScripts#115 did.
Explicitly out of scope here
clang-format: no first-party C++ in this repo.
- The Swift-symbol docs-drift checks proposed for
OCCTSwift in the wider proposal (section 3b):
not part of this pilot-pattern rollout, same as OCCTSwiftScripts#114's own scoping.
Process
Filed per the ecosystem policy's own gate: no repo implements without a filed issue first. PR to
follow, referencing this issue. Holding for review before merge, not to merge.
What
Roll out the ecosystem's proposed code-style policy to this repo, the second pilot after
OCCTSwiftScripts(#114 /#115), replicating that pattern
exactly.
Proposal doc:
ecosystemdocs/code-style-policy-proposal-2026-08.mdThis repo's facts
Sources/SwiftJWW/JWW.swift,DXFWriter.swift,Reader.swift,Sources/jww2dxf/main.swift,Tests/SwiftJWWTests/SwiftJWWTests.swift. Verysmall: full sweep, trivially so. No exemption manifest needed.
clang-formatneeded.okf/policies/). This adds a 7th..github/workflows/CI today. This bootstraps CI from nothing.Scope for this repo
.swift-format(100 col, 4-space, copied verbatim from OCCTSwiftScripts) plus a fullswift-format --in-placesweep ofSources/andTests/..swiftlint.yml, scoped toonly_rules: [orphaned_doc_comment](same reasoning asOCCTSwiftScripts: SwiftLint's default rule set fights swift-format's formatting opinions and
overlaps the ecosystem's own
code-structurepolicy on complexity).Scripts/comment-ratio-check.sh: report-only nudge (never fails), bash to match this repo'sown tooling convention.
.github/workflows/code-style.yml:swift-format lint --strictandswiftlint lint --strictas blocking gates, comment-ratio as a non-blocking step.
okf/policies/code-style.md, linked fromokf/index.md, this repo's 7th mandatory policy.swift-format lint --strict/swiftlint lint --strictfinding afterthe automatic sweep, the same way OCCTSwiftScripts#115 did.
Explicitly out of scope here
clang-format: no first-party C++ in this repo.OCCTSwiftin the wider proposal (section 3b):not part of this pilot-pattern rollout, same as OCCTSwiftScripts#114's own scoping.
Process
Filed per the ecosystem policy's own gate: no repo implements without a filed issue first. PR to
follow, referencing this issue. Holding for review before merge, not to merge.