Re: PKG_DEVELOPER=yes [Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/lang/zig]

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost>]

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:32:35AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost> writes:
> 
> > On 15.05.2020 15:09, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> >> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 09:03:38AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> >>>   B) i) bulk build using defaults 
> >>>      ii) bulk build according to some standard recommendations
> >>>
> >>> I would argue that
> >>>
> >>>   Bi should be equal to Bii.  Really, we should decide how bulk builds
> >>>   should be done (Bii) and set Bi to match
> >> 
> >> I do not want to force such a policy. If I want to just build my normal
> >> set of local packages automated with a limited list, I shouldn't have to
> >> deal with new "errors", that's counter-productive.
> >> 
> >> Joerg
> >> 
> >
> > I agree with this. The same checks shall be in individual (user) and
> > bulk builds.
> 
> So you think it's ok to have the same rules for
> 
>   user builds something
>   user runs pbulk without setting options
>   TNF build cluster runs pbulk
> 
> and if so that's what I  was ttrying to say.

"Official" builds should include all reasonable checks, even those we
know require additional dependencies and some processing time. I still
stand with PKG_DEVELOPER=yes should be used here. But, that's not a
policy I want to dictate for everyone. The interpreter warnings for
example do have a good chance of being irrevelant in many environments.
Same for the permission checks.

Joerg