[libvirt PATCH 23/23] build: add syntax-check rules for undesirable terms
jjongsma at redhat.com
Fri Jun 19 14:33:05 UTC 2020
On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 13:33 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:11:09PM +0200, Ján Tomko wrote:
> > On a Friday in 2020, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:33:00 +0100, Daniel Berrange wrote:
> > > > We don't check for "master", because there are too many
> > > > cases that we're not trying to eliminate at this time.
> > > >
> > Even if you consider the terms undesirable, consider using them in
> > the
> > commit summary instead of mentioning what you're not trying to do.
> > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange at redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > build-aux/syntax-check.mk | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> > > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > I don't think there's a technical reason forbiding these and it's
> > > almost
> > > borderline censorship. I refuse to put my R-b on this one.
> > >
> > Given how many files are excepted, I think it's a waste of
> > electricty to
> > even check for these.
> We have > 10,000 files in source control, of which only 150 are
> exempted and time required to check that won't even register
> in the noise. We shouldn't be relying on reviewers to check things
> that can trivially be automated, when we know reviewers often miss
Personally, I would be glad to have syntax-check catch a patch of mine
if I accidentally use one of these terms that we've decided are
undesirable. If it is necessary to use one of these terms in a patch,
and I can convince others that it is necessary, I can always submit a
patch adding an exception. But it forces me to think about the
terminology a bit more carefully, which seems like a reasonable thing.
I see no censorship concerns.
More information about the libvir-list