Toward that end... It occurs to me that one can easily deal with long CI logs by downloading them and processing locally with grep or search or whatever other filtering is needed.
So I'm tending to agree that there's no pressing need to filter the CI output at point of origin. And some reason not to if it might mask relevant data. We can think about whether specific things can be muted, and whether they want to be, after we have more experience working with what we've got and can better evaluate the trade-off. Move to table that suggestion for reconsideration at a later date. We have more important things to spend time on. -- /_ Joe Kesselman (he/him/his) -/ _) My Alexa skill for New Music/New Sounds fans: / https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09WJ3H657/ Caveat: Opinionated old geezer with overcompensated writer's block. May be redundant, verbose, prolix, sesquipedalian, didactic, officious, or redundant. ________________________________ From: Joseph Kesselman <kesh...@alum.mit.edu> Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 12:12:18 PM To: dev@xalan.apache.org <dev@xalan.apache.org> Subject: Can we keep Git more focused? We're getting into a bad pattern of trying to design in PR reviews. (I've been guilty of it too.) May I suggest that we keep review focused on "is it an improvement" and "is there any reason not to commit", and move extended discussion back to the dev list? One can always issue a subsequent PR if there is something that can be improved further. But we should be discussing most of those changes here before the next PR, rather than in the current PR. Yes, nit-picking is technically (and literally) grooming behavior. But it can get in the way of actually doing things. -- /_ Joe Kesselman (he/him/his) -/ _) My Alexa skill for New Music/New Sounds fans: / https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09WJ3H657/ Caveat: Opinionated old geezer with overcompensated writer's block. May be redundant, verbose, prolix, sesquipedalian, didactic, officious, or redundant.
