| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hans de Graaff <graaff@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
>> My view is that if this is a QA notice then, if a package doesn't |
| 5 |
>> emerge because of it, it is a Gentoo QA bug and package maintainers |
| 6 |
>> should be responsible for fixing it. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> Gentoo should not be applying patches simply to fix what certain people |
| 9 |
> consider to be 'poor programming practises', since such practices are |
| 10 |
> not in themselves bugs. Under certain circumstances it's appropriate to |
| 11 |
> notify upstream about such issues, but be aware that upstream may not |
| 12 |
> take kindly to external attempts to impose arbitrary coding standards |
| 13 |
> if there is no actual problem. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Especially considering the large number of false positives certain -W |
| 16 |
options generate. Compiler warnings should be for upstream and |
| 17 |
developers doing debugging to worry about, not downstream QA or our users. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
where to now? if i had to guess |
| 22 |
dirtyepic gentoo org i'm afraid to say antarctica's next |
| 23 |
9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8) |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives