On Mon, 2018-08-06 at 13:02 -0400, Randall S. Becker wrote:
>
> Any idea when this is going to be in an official release, and exactly
> what the settings will be for "Not Developer". I assume DEVELOPER=0
> and DEVOPTS=error, which is the current behaviour, correct? I am the
> platform maintainer
On August 6, 2018 1:42 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06 2018, Randall S. Becker wrote:
>
> > On August 6, 2018 12:40 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> >> On Sat, Aug 04 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >>
> >> > Duy Nguyen writes:
> >> >
> >> >> On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 8:11 AM
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 10:11:19AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > We're developers ourselves, and we interact with new developers that we
> > want to help. But there are masses of people[1] building Git who are
> > _not_ developers, and want the default to be as robust as possible.
> >
> I had the impression that DEVELOPER=1 was allowed to set flags that old
> versions might not even know about. Hence they might actually barf, even
> without -Werror. Maybe that's better since the introduction of the
> detect-compiler script, though.
>
> I do think we may have a skewed view of
On Mon, Aug 06 2018, Randall S. Becker wrote:
> On August 6, 2018 12:40 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 04 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>> > Duy Nguyen writes:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 8:11 AM Jonathan Nieder
>> wrote:
>> >>> My main concern is not about them but
On Mon, Aug 06 2018, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 06:40:14PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
>> Responding to the thread in general, perhaps people would like this more
>> if we turned DEVELOPER=1 DEVOPTS=no-error on by default?
>>
>> That's basically why I added it in
Hi,
Jeff King wrote:
> I had the impression that DEVELOPER=1 was allowed to set flags that old
> versions might not even know about. Hence they might actually barf, even
> without -Werror.
Yes.
[...]
> We're developers ourselves, and we interact with new developers that we
> want to help. But
On August 6, 2018 1:02 PM, Peff wrote:
> To: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
> Cc: Junio C Hamano ; Duy Nguyen
> ; Jonathan Nieder ; Stefan
> Beller ; Git Mailing List ; git-
> packag...@googlegroups.com; Han-Wen Nienhuys
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Makefile: enable DEVELOPER by default
&
On August 6, 2018 12:40 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 04 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > Duy Nguyen writes:
> >
> >> On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 8:11 AM Jonathan Nieder
> wrote:
> >>> My main concern is not about them but about other people building
> >>> from source in order to
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 06:40:14PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> Responding to the thread in general, perhaps people would like this more
> if we turned DEVELOPER=1 DEVOPTS=no-error on by default?
>
> That's basically why I added it in 99f763baf5 ("Makefile: add a DEVOPTS
> to suppress
On Sat, Aug 04 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Duy Nguyen writes:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 8:11 AM Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> My main concern is not about them but about other
>>> people building from source in order to run (instead of to develop)
>>> Git, and by extension, the people they
Hi,
Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 11:17 PM Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> utf8.c:486:28: warning: passing 'iconv_ibp *' (aka 'const char **') to
>>> parameter
>>> of type 'char **' discards qualifiers in nested pointer types
>>>
On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 11:33 PM Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 11:17 PM Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > So it looks like FreeBSD has modernized and we need to make that
> > conditional in config.mak.uname on $(uname_R). Do you know which
> > version of FreeBSD changed the signature?
On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 11:17 PM Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > utf8.c:486:28: warning: passing 'iconv_ibp *' (aka 'const char **') to
> > parameter
> > of type 'char **' discards qualifiers in nested pointer types
> > [-Wincompatible-pointer-types-discards-qualifiers]
>
> Oh, good catch!
Eric Sunshine wrote:
> And, compilation warnings are not limited to old compilers. Even my
> fully up-to-date FreeBSD 11.2 installation is not warning-free[1].
>
> [1]: For instance:
> utf8.c:486:28: warning: passing 'iconv_ibp *' (aka 'const char **') to
> parameter
> of type 'char **'
On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 2:38 AM Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 8:11 AM Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > My main concern is not about them but about other
> > people building from source in order to run (instead of to develop)
> > Git, and by extension, the people they go to for help when it
Duy Nguyen writes:
> On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 8:11 AM Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> My main concern is not about them but about other
>> people building from source in order to run (instead of to develop)
>> Git, and by extension, the people they go to for help when it doesn't
>> work. I have lots
On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 8:11 AM Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> My main concern is not about them but about other
> people building from source in order to run (instead of to develop)
> Git, and by extension, the people they go to for help when it doesn't
> work. I have lots of bitter experience of
Hi,
Stefan Beller wrote:
> Reviewer bandwidth is limited, so let's have the machine of the
> (potentially new) contributor warn about issues with the code by default.
>
> As setting DEVELOPER, the compiler is stricter and we may run into problems
> on some architectures. But packagers of said
Reviewer bandwidth is limited, so let's have the machine of the
(potentially new) contributor warn about issues with the code by default.
As setting DEVELOPER, the compiler is stricter and we may run into problems
on some architectures. But packagers of said platforms are knowledgeable
enough to
Reviewer bandwidth is limited, so let's have the machine of the
(potentially new) contributor warn about issues with the code by default.
As setting DEVELOPER, the compiler is stricter and we may run into problems
on some architectures. But packagers of said platforms are knowledgeable
enough to
21 matches
Mail list logo
