Alexander Gorshenev wrote:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Stephen Lau wrote:
Richard Lowe wrote:
For 6495337, I tend to think it should not be a stopper, because we can
just tell internal folks to have both the open and closd tree present.
(And AFAIK warlock is not available for the external folks.) But I
wanted to mention it in case anyone wants to argue differently.
See above, I agree. But I *really* want warlock to be available
outside.
I personally see it being available as a prerequisite to:
6493270 nightly.sh should make it easier to run warlock.
So while it's not a stopper, I'd really like to figure out if we can
get warlock available to all of us and working, either way.
(I've asked about it before, but didn't really get much in the way of
answer)
What *are* the issues with keeping warlock closed? I was under the
impression it was a Sun developed tool..
I agree, it's not a stopper - but it seems like warlock would be a
useful tool, and we advocate the use of it internally; it seems to
make sense that we should try and advocate its use externally as well.
Not before the lock_lint vs. warlock issue resolved one way or another.
I doubt Sun wants to have two equivalent supported tools with different
names.
I don't think anyone asked for it to be supported any more than it is already.
The fact remains that as long as warlock is only available to a subset of
engineers working within ON "warlock clean" cannot be made an integration
requirement, and it's a fairly desirable thing...
-- Rich
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
