Martin Dummer <martin.dum...@gmx.net> writes: > Am 03.05.24 um 06:39 schrieb Sam James: > > > What we really need is: > a) https://bugs.gentoo.org/162450 to avoid scaring users; > b) possibly some level of QA notice to distinguish between "check this > out" (think e.g. qa-vdb LHS where it _might_ be unused, but not > necessarily), and "this is definitely wrong" > > I am convinced we need a), I am not-at-all convinced we need b) - at > least not in terms of whether bugs are reported. > > AFAIS https://bugs.gentoo.org/162450 is not implemented.
Right, that's why I didn't say "we can just use". > > Maybe we can agree that the qa-warnings in vdr-eclass make more sense if i > change them to "eawarn" or "einfo"? > Sure, make them eqawarn. > In my opinion, most plugins in the vdr context will practically not develop > any further anyway. It is more important to > keep the current status of vdr-software in the ecosystem up to date as well > as possible. > > So I need a practical useful approach instead of a fundamental discussion > please. My point is that the QA warnings should exist, and you can worry about making them "developer-only" in future. Right now, they seem useful, and the things they flag need to be addressed.
