From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HospC-00007V-4W for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 03:08:14 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l4I37GPt032154; Fri, 18 May 2007 03:07:16 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l4I35R1U029979 for ; Fri, 18 May 2007 03:05:27 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56E9B649F6 for ; Fri, 18 May 2007 03:05:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -0.863 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.863 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.863] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8Tz6tJeznt5d for ; Fri, 18 May 2007 03:05:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F884649F3 for ; Fri, 18 May 2007 03:05:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HosmJ-0003Mf-W7 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 05:05:16 +0200 Received: from static24-72-114-155.yorkton.accesscomm.ca ([24.72.114.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 18 May 2007 05:05:15 +0200 Received: from dirtyepic by static24-72-114-155.yorkton.accesscomm.ca with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 18 May 2007 05:05:15 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Ryan Hill Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: 'stricter' FEATURE and "poor programming practices" notice Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 21:05:01 -0600 Message-ID: References: <1179400321.5388.5.camel@ip6-localhost> <20070517122350.6cd95be9@snowflake> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: static24-72-114-155.yorkton.accesscomm.ca User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4pre (X11/20070515) In-Reply-To: <20070517122350.6cd95be9@snowflake> Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 049f0ed5-0d3a-4f72-baf6-bd1f583e7d7f X-Archives-Hash: 2d97c1074ef397a8501d4250e7dd965b Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Hans de Graaff wrote: >> My view is that if this is a QA notice then, if a package doesn't >> emerge because of it, it is a Gentoo QA bug and package maintainers >> should be responsible for fixing it. > Gentoo should not be applying patches simply to fix what certain people > consider to be 'poor programming practises', since such practices are > not in themselves bugs. Under certain circumstances it's appropriate to > notify upstream about such issues, but be aware that upstream may not > take kindly to external attempts to impose arbitrary coding standards > if there is no actual problem. Especially considering the large number of false positives certain -W options generate. Compiler warnings should be for upstream and developers doing debugging to worry about, not downstream QA or our users. -- where to now? if i had to guess dirtyepic gentoo org i'm afraid to say antarctica's next 9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list