On Saturday 20 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:15:12AM CET: > > On Monday 15 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > > > > Well then we should adjust maintainer-check to not complain. Either > > > way, maintainer-check results should not deteriorate. > > > I'm not keen on meddling with the current maintainer-check rules, which > > are already quite hackish and not very easy to extend IMHO. > > ;-) > > > So I'd like > > to seize this opportunity to push again my patch on a re-implementation > > of maintainer-check (in perl), which offers easy whitelisting of false > > positives, and more flexibility in pre-processing the input lines (which > > can be useful in case of more complex checks): > > <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2010-07/msg00084.html> > > Gnulib has a few more facilities in this area, and several GNU projects > use them already. > Do these facilities allow whitelisting at least at the "file:line" level? Do they allow whitelisting through (possibly file-specific) regexps? If yes, then I agree that we should use them instead of diverging more and add more code duplication. If not, they are not flexible enough IMHO.
> It would be good if we worked toward common facilities here, rather than > diverging more from it. > Besides, I kinda dislike using perl where sed would suffice. > But it does not suffice, unless you can think of an easy way to do the whitelisting described above with grep+sed (personally, I can't). > Yes, I'm probably being selfish and stubborn on this one ... > ;-) > Another nit at cited patch of yours is that makefile rules run in > parallel, the perl script tests don't. > ATM, the time required to run all the maintchecks is low enough that this is not a problem. And IMHO we can always optimize later if speed becomes a problem. > This helps speed, but also allows me to choose between stopping > on first error or not (make -k). > My perl script never stops at the first error: I saw no reason to allow such a behaviour. But I think we could easily enhance the script to make that configurable, if it's desiderable. It's still just an "RFC" after all. BTW, a much more serious limitation of my script is that it currently doesn't work in VPATH builds -- which is unacceptable. Suggestions about how to fix that without complicating the script too much are very welcome. Regards, Stefano