Excerpts from Yann Rouillard's message of Sat Aug 25 11:19:27 -0400 2012: > 2012/8/25 Ben Walton <[email protected]> > > > > > Yes, I'm just thinking about a transition phase where it will be > > really noisy (as you mentioned). If it's the way we're going to go > > though, the negative check is proper and to be overridden by > > maintainers if the package doesn't comply. > > > > > Oh ok ! I was thinking about enabling the checkpkg checks only after we > sufficiently tested that the option would not cause problem on the first > set of package. That was the transition phase :)
Sure, that's fine too. We don't want the check to be noisy before we're fairly confident that it will be a worthwhile switch. > The problem with informative only messages is that it could easily be > missed in all checkpkg messages. True. Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
