From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
Joel Schopp <jschopp@austin.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] update checkpatch.pl to version 0.10
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 10:22:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070929092203.GB13737@shadowen.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070928104642.0f3a4573.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:46:42AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 14:21:38 +0100 Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 12:49:35PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 11:39:02AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > [bunfight]
> >
>
> oy, knock it off.
Really not trying to have a bunfight, honest.
> > Anyhow. I have already added a --check/--no-check option which controls
>
> -strict?
>
> > the more subjective tests which will be in the next release; though its
> > likely the option name will be something more useful by then.
> >
> > The only question is whether this should default to on. You are voting
> > off. I personally think on.
> >
> > Andrew? Randy? Joel?
> >
>
> off, I'd say. That way people are more likely to use it. Or, more
> accurately, will have less excuses to not use it.
Ok, then I think thats 2 for on and 3 for off. So off it is.
I was tending towards --subjective for the tests which are err more
subjective. --strict is good too. Perhaps I'll put both of those in as
aliases.
I will also review the tests which are warnings and checks (subjective)
and see if any are now miss-categorised.
-apw
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-29 9:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-12 15:00 [PATCH] update checkpatch.pl to version 0.10 Andy Whitcroft
2007-09-28 8:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-28 9:01 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-28 9:22 ` Andy Whitcroft
2007-09-28 9:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-28 10:00 ` Andy Whitcroft
2007-09-28 10:46 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-09-28 11:03 ` WANG Cong
2007-09-28 14:19 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-09-28 16:57 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-09-28 10:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-28 13:21 ` Andy Whitcroft
2007-09-28 13:37 ` Pekka Enberg
2007-09-28 14:02 ` Andy Whitcroft
2007-09-28 15:50 ` Joel Schopp
2007-09-28 17:26 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-09-28 17:46 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-29 9:22 ` Andy Whitcroft [this message]
2007-10-05 5:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-28 16:51 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-09-28 9:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-28 9:52 ` Andy Whitcroft
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=20070929092203.GB13737@shadowen.org \
--to=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jschopp@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
/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