At Wednesday 21 April 2010, Ralf Wildenhues <ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de>
wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:04:51AM CEST:
> > Another simple patch aimed at making the Automake test scripts
> > use `set -e' more consistently.
>
> Can we merge this patch with all others that are still to come and
> set -e on tests?
Mmhh... I'm not sure this would be a good idea.
In fact, I'm inclined to keep the patches enabling `set -e' separated
for three reasons:
1. To make the analysis of these patches simpler (as they are very
short); this should tendentially lead to more accurate reviews --
which is very important for the kind of changes introduced by the
patches, because, as you pointed out in a previous thread, the
`errexit' shell flag is particularly prone to portability problems
and bugs.
2. To make it easy for you to reject changes deemed unworthy,
dubious or dangerous, and to make it easier for me to amend
changes (if required).
3. So that the changes can be done incrementally, maybe even on
an extended time period (which should alleviate the "not enough
time for the review" problem).
However, I could at least clump the changes in bigger lumps (say a
dozen of files modified togheter), if you still think this would be more
convenient. WDYT?
Regards,
Stefano
