Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] clean up some code around editors

[Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 2:22 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
> >>  ifdef DEVELOPER
> >>  include config.mak.dev
> >> +all:: check-developer
> >>  endif
> >> ...
> > Not a bad idea, though I don't think we need to hide the target behind
> > DEVELOPER.
>
> This target is designed to be a collection of light-weight tests for
> your uncooked code, so running it when somebody makes a production
> build should *not* be too costly, but at the same time, it is more
> or less pointless---if it catches somethig for a build engineer, it
> is way too late.

Ugh, I missed the bit where you had wired it into the "all" target; I
misread it as defining the "check-developer" target only if DEVELOPER
was set, so my response was bogus. Sorry for the noise.

> On the other hand, if you have only started to add a new command and
> trying to see if your skeletal implementation even compiles, it may
> be annoying to be told that you still have to write documentation.
> You may already know you need to, but you are not ready to do so
> yet.  Even though I on purpose made the checks run as part of "all"
> to give the target more exposure, I am not sure if limiting to
> developer is still too aggressive.

Indeed, wiring it into "all" may be too aggressive. Because I missed
that bit, I had thought that you just meant for developers to run
"make check-developer" manually. Documenting it in SubmittingPatches
may be the lesser evil.