On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 4:05 AM, Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: > > But importing different upstream testsuites with different annotation > systems allows them to make GCC maintainer's lives miserable? If this > trend continues, maintainers need to cope with several different > annoation systems with different capabilites instead of a single one, > some of them lacking necessary features which are already present in > DejaGnu (which leads to handling stuff that's just a simple annotation > in DejaGnu in the testsuite drivers instead).
Yes, that is true. But when you say "if this trend continues" you are making a slippery slope argument that I don't think applies. To date, the trend consists of a single example. We are discussing adding a second example, and we may decide against it. There are no current prospects of a third example. > I'm not asking upstreams > to deal with DejaGnu themselves, just to accept that the dg annotations > live in their repos. Where it would be untested and unmaintained. Do you think we would be happy adding additional annotations to our testsuite for the benefit of some other project? Ian
