Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Steven J Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: comprehensive eclass checking in repoman
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 22:12:08
Message-Id: jpmbl5$j2p$1@dough.gmane.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] comprehensive eclass checking in repoman by Mike Frysinger
1 Mike Frysinger wrote:
2 > ..the proposal is to utilize the existing eclass documentation markers
3 > ..the metadata stays current, and we can scale better to all eclasses
4
5 > if people don't properly document their eclasses, repoman might throw
6 > false positives (warnings, not errors) about unused eclasses
7
8 > will miss throwing errors when functions are used but the respective
9 > eclasses aren't inherited.
10
11 > however, i think that's a good hammer to throw at eclass maintainers to
12 > keep their documentation up-to-date and accurate.
13 > any other opinions/feedback?
14
15 I think it's an excellent idea to give this kind of QA early, to avoid
16 issues like recent eutils inheritance changes in the future; it's not a
17 hammer so much as a helpful reminder, that improves things for everyone.
18
19 You could maybe tighten the false-negative side by scanning all functions
20 defined in an eclass, and warning if they're undocumented.
21
22 Steve.
23 --
24 #friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: comprehensive eclass checking in repoman Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>