Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] repoman --nonag (was Re: gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings )
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 16:57:35
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] repoman --nonag (was Re: gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings ) by Rich Freeman
2 Hash: SHA256
4 On 12/08/14 12:36 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
5 > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
6 > wrote:
7 >>
8 >> I'm wondering what everyone thinks of having a --nonag option to
9 >> repoman and shoving some of the more trivial/style-related
10 >> repoman 'warnings' into a 'nag' level warning? IIRC at least one
11 >> of the QA team members is so tired of the warnings that they want
12 >> to make every single one of them errors; the --nonag option would
13 >> allow those warnings to remain in repoman (ie to help guide new
14 >> dev's or non-dev's using repoman on their local repos) but since
15 >> they don't relate to actual technical breakage they can just be
16 >> turned off during QA runs, etc.
17 >>
18 >
19 > What, specifically, are we considering trivial?
20 >
21 > The whole point of repoman is to prevent devs from making
22 > mistakes. Being able to turn off warnings is counterproductive.
23 > Eliminating warnings that don't need to be warnings is of course
24 > fine.
25 >
26 > There is no value in having an escalating battle between warnings
27 > and options to suppress them.
28 >
29 > Rich
30 >
32 Well, there's warnings related to style, like
33 DESCRIPTION-ending-in-period, and then there's warnings relating to
34 technical or functional issues. Of the second set, there are fatal
35 ones and then there are ones that aren't fatal but still important
36 (DEPENDENCY.badindev comes to mind). I think the style or other
37 non-functional warnings (i can't actually think of any that aren't
38 style related, tbh) are great to have, and perhaps should even be
39 expanded if someone felt so inclined, but not at the expense of
40 additional noise all the time for groups like QA that are primarily
41 concerned about maintaining functionality. So instead of, for
42 instance, dropping the DESCRIPTION-ending-in-period check, it could
43 instead be relegated to a "nag" that could be hidden with --nonag.
45 Essentially what it boils down to is that I don't see every non-fatal
46 warning as being equivalent in importance, and it might make sense to
47 push the ones that could be construed as recommendations rather than
48 warnings to a lighter level.
50 If there isn't any support for this idea, then of course let's skip it
51 and we can drop the check(s) instead if that's what's desired by the
52 community. Then it's just a question of how far we might want to go
53 in terms of dropping checks.
56 Version: GnuPG v2
58 iF4EAREIAAYFAlPqR28ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPCQfQEAgs9Zbpw9rkXjZpJUrM6s0/LZ
59 mGm1UeLe0iNN0zKn8JwBAJZ2NL1tEDA+8X15UHsT4mBTevK+I3cv9+l6R7j6AtGq
60 =ptmP
61 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----