On Sun, 15 May 2016 04:18:39 -0700 Daniel Campbell wrote: > On 05/15/2016 02:15 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > > On Sun, 15 May 2016 11:05:21 +0200 > > Jeroen Roovers wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 7 May 2016 23:25:58 +0200 > >> Michał Górny wrote: > >> > >>> Do you seriously expect this code to work? How about testing? Or > >>> reading diffs before committing? > >> > >> > >> Somebody could have a go at implementing this: > >> > >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=390651 > >> > >> It's been brewing for half a decade. Maybe it's time. :) > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> jer > >> > > > > With the new repoman code structure, yes, it would be a lot easier > > to implement. > > > > Also with the gen-b0rk test repo, that will be a good testing ground > > for eclass changes too. It just needs more devs to make test > > ebuilds to get it fully populated ;) > > > What sort of test ebuilds are you looking for? There are a few > packages I'd like to see get into Gentoo but I don't want to break > anything. :P > Have a look at the gen-b0rk repo, See how the ebuilds are done, follow those examples. There are lots more errors that repoman looks for that are not yet covered by test ebuilds. There are a few more in other areas of code, but here is the biggest list of errors/warnings that repoman can test for. https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/tree/repoman/pym/repoman/qa_data.py?h=repoman -- Brian Dolbec