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

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

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.

> If there is a chance that something builds by an accident, just creating
> broken package does not improve the situation over returning an error.
> This is rather the opposite and increases the frustration of users.
>
> pkglint or similar auxiliary tools should be just optional on discretion
> of a developer (and highly recommended).

So you mean "checks that we don't want to turn on for user and bulk
builds should be used as pre-commit checks by developers"?   If so again
I think that's what I was trying to say.