On 5/1/24 10:10 AM, Martin Dummer wrote: > Since Agostino's tinderbox tests now report qa warning, the group > v...@gentoo.org has 101 open bugs assigned, most of them caused by qa > warnings from vdr-plugin-2.eclass. > > Many vdr plugins need small adjustments because API or makefile changes > in upstream media-video/vdr which can be easily fixed with small changes. > > These warnings are only useful for the vdr plugin maintainers, so I > propose they should (only) be reported as QA-warnings when the global > variable > VDR_MAINTAINER_MODE="1" > is set in make.conf > > This patch is also put to github in > https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/36504 > > The PR is lacking many many "Closes: ...." tags, which I will fill in soon. > > Any comments?
What does "only useful for the vdr plugin maintainers" mean? Why can't anyone fix them? There are lots of QA warnings that a package can generate, and lots of them are "only" relevant to someone editing the upstream source code. Why should vdr plugins be special? From a quick glance at the warning messages, my inexpert feeling is that two of them are a bit "wishy-washy" and could be classified as "a warning to be picky and do best practices": - gettext handling - old Makefile handling The others seem like worrisome issues that should very much be reported in tinderboxes and get fixed. Automatically sed'ing out source code, especially for the one that says "please recheck", very much looks like the purpose of the qa warning is that the functionality isn't trusted to be correct, is offered on a best-effort basis, and needs to be manually reviewed and marked as okay (by applying as a real patch) in order to squelch the warnings. In other words, there are "QA issues" and "QA nitpicks". -- Eli Schwartz
OpenPGP_0x84818A6819AF4A9B.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
