Re: [PATCH 2/2] ci: bump ubuntu image version for static-analysis job

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

> They'd of course require a bit of a deeper look, but that could be
> another way to speed up Coccinelle for us. Even though I cannot say for
> sure by how much, I didn't give it a test.

Another benefit is that it would reduce the programmer's burden, as
it is not immediately apparent which rules are still relevant.

I wonder if we can easily define the exit criteria when we introduce
a new rule and document them, immediately next to the rules.

You said "refs, object_id, the_repository, ... all look like we have
long done with the migrations"; in retrospect, would it have been
easily doable for those who introduced these rules to describe how
we would declare "now migration is done"?  If so, perhaps a good
step forward may be to update tools/coccinelle/README to add such a
rule.

    ... goes and looks ...

The readme file clearly states that transformations needed for
migrations are *not* regularly run.  Is it possible that we have
these rules you mentioned misclassified?