Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 11:35:12 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | * Just because breaking policy breaks a QA tool, but is guaranteed to > | never break itself (formatting policy, like space vs. tab etc.) > | does not increase the severity of the breakage. > > I'd argue against this one. See, it's possible to deliberately > circumvent some of repoman's checks by doing weird whitespace and syntax > trickery. There's also no way to fix repoman short of writing a fully > functional bash parsing tool -- which is complicated enough that even > bash doesn't have one that works in some releases...
QA shouldn't have to depend on the tools you use. The final say should be the human interaction. If doing weird white spaces breaks the tool, but really isn't a QA issue outside of neatness, it shouldn't be waving red flags. Yes, its probably something that should be fixed, but it shouldn't be a critical one just because the tool is broken and can't handle the weirdness. -- Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager --- GPG Public Key: <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc> Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742 ramereth/irc.freenode.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
