From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
Cc: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder.dev@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, "Glen Choo" <chooglen@google.com>,
"Taylor Blau" <me@ttaylorr.com>,
"Elijah Newren" <newren@gmail.com>,
"Junio C Hamano" <junio@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cocci: remove 'unused.cocci'
Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 15:45:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqv8gz24c7.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <230501.865y9chs69.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> ("Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason"'s message of "Mon, 01 May 2023 19:28:50 +0200")
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
> A better way to spot that would be to start parsing the coccinelle logs,
> and detect when we have unknown parsing issues, and error on those. But
> until then...
Until then, I do not think a rather costly test that has found only
4 instances of the mistakes the test was designed to find is a good
way to stand in as a replacement.
Let's drop it, as it is easy to resurrect if somebody wants to run
it from time to time from an old version of Git. Or is it a valid
alternative to move it to "pending"?
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-10 22:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-12 20:05 [PATCH 0/2] cocci: codify authoring and reviewing practices Glen Choo via GitGitGadget
2023-04-12 20:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] cocci: add headings to and reword README Glen Choo via GitGitGadget
2023-04-12 21:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-13 18:37 ` Glen Choo
2023-04-13 18:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-12 20:05 ` [PATCH 2/2] cocci: codify authoring and reviewing practices Glen Choo via GitGitGadget
2023-04-16 7:42 ` SZEDER Gábor
2023-04-19 19:29 ` Glen Choo
2023-04-20 20:53 ` [PATCH] cocci: remove 'unused.cocci' SZEDER Gábor
2023-04-21 2:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-01 13:27 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2023-05-01 15:55 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-01 17:28 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2023-05-10 22:45 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2023-04-16 13:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] cocci: codify authoring and reviewing practices Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2023-04-19 22:30 ` Glen Choo
2023-04-15 1:27 ` [PATCH 0/2] " Elijah Newren
2023-04-17 16:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-27 22:22 ` [PATCH v2 " Glen Choo via GitGitGadget
2023-04-27 22:22 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] cocci: add headings to and reword README Glen Choo via GitGitGadget
2023-05-01 10:53 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2023-05-01 15:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-02 19:29 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-02 19:30 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-09 17:54 ` Glen Choo
2023-04-27 22:22 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] cocci: codify authoring and reviewing practices Glen Choo via GitGitGadget
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqv8gz24c7.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=chooglen@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=junio@pobox.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=szeder.dev@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).