I would like to kindly reminder that it is vote thread

On Tue, 30 Sept 2025 at 15:51, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
wrote:

> This is wrong Elliotte, your fix breaks others - see the example I gave,
> basically any time an user doesn't use the RI - which is common - your fix
> is wrong.
>
> > It is far more important to make sure that all emitted warnings are
> accurate and actionable than to make sure we warn about everything
> that might be a minor problem with some very low probability.
>
> This is right and the reason your PR doesn't work. A compromise if you do
> not want to implement a complete fix is to add a bucket "uncertain" in the
> output and let the user configure exclusions but like this, this doesn't
> look mergeable to me without a real rework if you want to keep the mojo
> valuable.
>
> Le mar. 30 sept. 2025 à 13:23, Elliotte Rusty Harold <[email protected]>
> a
> écrit :
>
> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 7:09 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > I'm mixed cause this stays a challenge cause you do not handle most of
> > the
> > > gav still.
> >
> > I'm not sure what your point is. Most artifacts won't and shouldn't be
> > touched by this approach. Of those that are, more can be added once we
> > stop bikeshedding on exactly how to do this, roll up our sleeves, and
> > get to work. If this PR had been approved when first submitted, we'd
> > be pretty close to done by now. We started with something like 100
> > problems. I fixed one so we're down to ~99. Merge this and we're at
> > 98. Every one we fix is an improvement, whether we fix the others or
> > not. Delaying isn't helping.
> >
> >
> > > I'm also mixed about it cause it also creates bugs.
> > > Take you jsonp example, add johnzon as impl....and your exclusion
> should
> > > trigger the current bug cause the impl used is no more glassfish one
> > > (hardcoded one) but johnzon thanks the SPI overriding.
> >
> > Bugs are not created equal. Almost every warning for this dependency
> > is a false positive that wastes developers' time and attention and
> > teaches them to ignore or turn off dependency analysis. Hypothetically
> > there might somewhere be a true positive, but even if we convert that
> > one true positive into a false negative, it's not a big deal. Someone
> > has one extra unused dependency. The code still works.
> >
> > It is far more important to make sure that all emitted warnings are
> > accurate and actionable than to make sure we warn about everything
> > that might be a minor problem with some very low probability.
> >
> > --
> > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > [email protected]
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
>


-- 
Sławomir Jaranowski

Reply via email to