Patrick Lauer:
ebuild.badheader,
That would break repoman for the majority of overlays. You don't really
expect overlay maintainers to follow gentoo copyright, do you?
Really... before repoman is fixed, none of this will happen (or people
will just run a hacked repoman version).
On 16 Feb 2015 11:45, Rafael Goncalves Martins wrote:
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On 16 Feb 2015 21:00, Patrick Lauer wrote:
Thus I suggest making the following warnings proper errors:
some of these are because they produce false positives. at least these bugs
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 21:00:16 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
Right now repoman is relatively permissive - it whines about many
things, but treats many issues as warning.
The result is that many ebuilds get committed with 'minor' cosmetic
issues which then someone more OCD than
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
Thus I suggest making the following warnings proper errors:
(Taken from current repoman 'qawarnings' set)
changelog.missing,
changelog.notadded,
These two are pretty much irrelevant now that repoman auto-generates
Right now repoman is relatively permissive - it whines about many things, but
treats many issues as warning.
The result is that many ebuilds get committed with 'minor' cosmetic issues
which then someone more OCD than the original committer cleans up, making
pretty much everyone involved more
Thus I suggest making the following warnings proper errors:
(Taken from current repoman 'qawarnings' set)
changelog.missing,
changelog.notadded,
digest.assumed,
digest.unused,
ebuild.notadded,
ebuild.nesteddie,
DESCRIPTION.toolong,
RESTRICT.invalid,
ebuild.minorsyn,
On Feb 16, 2015 8:01 AM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
Right now repoman is relatively permissive - it whines about many things,
but
treats many issues as warning.
The result is that many ebuilds get committed with 'minor' cosmetic issues
which then someone more OCD than the
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 16 Feb 2015 21:00, Patrick Lauer wrote:
Thus I suggest making the following warnings proper errors:
some of these are because they produce false positives. at least these bugs
probably need to be fixed first:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
FWIW: I'm in the warnings are pointless, either we care about
something (so make it an error), or we don't (so get rid of it).
- --
Alexander
berna...@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 16/02/15 14:02, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
FWIW: I'm in the warnings are pointless, either we care about
something (so make it an error), or we don't (so get rid of it).
s/\./ camp./
(I accidentally a word...)
- --
Alexander
El lun, 16-02-2015 a las 21:00 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
[...]
I agree
On 16 Feb 2015 21:00, Patrick Lauer wrote:
Thus I suggest making the following warnings proper errors:
some of these are because they produce false positives. at least these bugs
probably need to be fixed first:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/405017
https://bugs.gentoo.org/488836
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 21:00:16 +0800 Patrick Lauer wrote:
Right now repoman is relatively permissive - it whines about many things, but
treats many issues as warning.
The result is that many ebuilds get committed with 'minor' cosmetic issues
which then someone more OCD than the original
13 matches
Mail list logo
