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 f
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 J
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.
> > They're
> 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 the
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 a
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 99f763
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 go
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
>>> [-Wincompatible-pointer-types-discards-qua
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? C
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 **' dis
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 of
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 -Werr
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 pla
19 matches
Mail list logo
