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

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

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:18:29AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost> writes:
> 
> >> 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.
> 
> Now I understand you, I think.   And you disagree with Jonathan.

I wouldn't go so far to say that we disagree, but I think we are drawing
somewhat different lines. We certainly seem to agree on running bulk
builds with PKG_DEVELOPER is a good idea :)

> But I think everybody agrees that we can and should cause inexpesnive,
> no-additonal-dependency checks currently only enabled in PKG_DEVELOPER
> to be always enabled.  Correct?

Sure, that seems to be uncontested.

Joerg