On Mar 15, 2020, at 10:26, Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 2:33 AM Dan Eble <d...@faithful.be> wrote: >> >> On Mar 14, 2020, at 19:39, Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 9:16 PM Dan Eble <d...@faithful.be> wrote: >>>> I assume the warnings are incorrect, otherwise you would be asking for >>>> help to fix them rather than asking whether checking the HTML is valuable. >>>> Is that assumption correct? >>> >>> The version on Xenial generates these warnings, while the version on >>> Fedora doesn't, which is pretty confusing. >> >> Certainly, but the question is whether they are legitimate. > > Nobody has complained about HTML compliance of the regtests, so I > think this is fine either way.
Another dodge. >> How many grains of rice make a heap? Line up all the small things in a >> makefile that "you could just do" and it isn't long before you can't just do >> them anymore. > > Line up all the things you could just add to the Makefile, and you'll > end up with large Makefiles that are hard to understand and maintain. > This is the place where we are today, and I'd rather move away from > that. You haven't justified it in my eyes, but have it your way. — Dan