On 10/09/2013 7:18 a.m., Kinkie wrote:
>> Another [debatable] flaw is that Squid build fails on harmless warnings.
>> All of that is not important though.
> This is an interesting point; let's debate :)
>
> Now that our CI infrastructure has grown quite a bit, we may have to
> rely less on outside reporting of trivial issues. If that is the case,
> what do you think about dropping the default level of paranoia in the
> build flags, leaving that as optional for the build farm to use?
I consider that improved testing setup a good reason to *keep* the
strict error checking enabled by default. Our setup still cannot test
everything conclusively and while the need for user feedback is lessened
it has not gone away. Certainly it is still very present in the more
closed-source of the downstream build systems which we do not or cannot
test for. The later user experience building Squid is better for the
small amount of pain early-adopters are (knowingly) faced with.
Amos
Received on Sat Sep 21 2013 - 13:31:44 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Sep 23 2013 - 12:00:12 MDT