[edk2-devel] [PATCH v3 13/14] ArmPkg: Turn off spellcheck audit mode

[Ard Biesheuvel]

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 17:38, Michael Kubacki
<mikuback at linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/15/2022 5:42 AM, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 19:04:06 -0500, Michael Kubacki wrote:
> >> I'm just trying to understand your position.
> >>
> >> Are you saying you would rather people check in typos and then later have
> >> patches come into the package to fix them?
> >>
> >> For example, like these:
> >>
> >> - ArmVirtPkg: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/97021
> >> - ArmPkg: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/97022
> >>
> >> Why not just have the code checked in without typos in the first place?
> >
> > A little fairy once whispered in my ear that if I stopped myself and
> > tried to rephrase whenever I found myself using the work "just", I
> > would meet less friction in context-stripping communication mediums
> > such as email. They weren't wrong.
> >
>
> This topic is met with friction regardless of how it is phrased.
>
> The friction exists because the community chose to enable spell checking
> in CI and it is not wanted here.
>
> The mechanism chosen to ignore words was through YAML files rather than
> a button. A common YAML file can store words for the whole project and
> packages can add package-specific words. The community was expected to
> make the contributions necessary in the common file to minimize impact
> on package maintainers.
>
> The spellcheck log outputs the exact code that needs to be copied/pasted
> to the exception list - whether the global list or package list. If you
> run CI locally, you can copy/paste the exact lines needed.
>
> This is a patch series I work on in my spare time to try to improve the
> project. I am tired of Ard's dismissive and passive aggressive responses
> such as those in https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/97433 so I
> revoke the series and will let others decide what they want to do.
>

I don't think this is a fair characterization of my response. I
explained in detail why I think rigid spellcheck rules are
counter-productive and do not contribute to the quality of what gets
deployed to devices.

Nevertheless, I apologize if my frustration with the recent CI changes
managed to seep through, although I should also mention that I am a
big fan of the pre-merge build and boot tests, as they have been a
huge help in my workflow. Only the rigid enforcement of standards that
are purely cosmetic is what bothers me, especially because finding the
error messages (and suggestions for improvement) in the complex UI is
not as straight-forward as it is made out to be.

That said, it would be helpful if you could respond to the actual
points I made, rather than dismissing them wholesale as a
passive-aggressive and hostile response. You have presented your
contribution as a take-it-or-leave-it style change, rather than
engaging with Leif and me as the package maintainers to converge on
something that we can all agree on.

You may have also missed my question/invitation regarding
collaboration on IBT/BTI enablement in UEFI.

Kind regards,
Ard.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#97930): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/97930
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/95678218/1813853
Group Owner: devel+owner at edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [edk2-devel-archive at redhat.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-