One could probably break the PVS report into a big TODO list and then check items once someone addresses a part of the big issue.
Another option is to break them into comments and then one can link to a comment inside PVS issue, but this would quickly render issue page unusable. >From my point of view -- both are worse than scripting separate sub-issues. E-mails can be deleted and issues which are closed don't obscure the view of opened issues. Cheers, Denis. On Friday, November 11, 2016 at 10:24:41 PM UTC+1, Timo Heister wrote: > > Hey all, > > while I am very happy to see many static analysis problems to be > reported and fixed, I would like to discuss the bulk creation of > github issues that has happened over the last weeks. > > I feel these create unnecessary noise (when browsing issues and in our > email inboxes) that makes it difficult to look at other pullrequests > and issues and as such waste time. I also don't see an advantage over > having a single issue and partially addressing it if it is too much > work to tackle them in a single PR. > > Thoughts? > > -- > Timo Heister > http://www.math.clemson.edu/~heister/ > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "deal.II developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dealii-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
