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

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Perhaps we should think in terms of multiple levels of checks, rather
than PKG_DEVELOPER=yes or not.  As I see it there are multiple
situations:

  1) random users building packages
  2) users who are testing package changes for gnats or wip
  3) people with commit access to pkgsrc who are building/testing,
     perhaps prior to commit
  4) people who are looking for trouble
  5) bulk builds


It seems pretty clear that check strictness should be

  4 >= 3 >= 2 >= 1

It's not really clear how 5 should be set; I don't see any real argument
for 1 being less strict than 5. and I don't see why 4 should be stricter
than 1.


The other argument is the usual WARNS one: once a tree is pretty clean
at any particular warning level, it might as well become the default.

So overall I'd say (with the percentages being strawmen):

  If any check (whether PKG_DEVELOPER=yes or not) is such that >98%
  all packeges that build at all build with the check, just make it
  default. thus imposing it on 1-4 (and 5).

  If adding a check would cause some packages to fail, but say 90% of
  packages are ok with it, put it in PKG_DEVELOPER=yes.

  Declare that anyone who is sending a PR or commiting to pkgsrc proper
  or wip must set PKG_DEVELOPER=yes.

  Encourage people to set PKG_DEVELOPER_EXTRA=yes (which could be like
  CHECK_PORTABILITY_EXPERIMENTAL), for checks that will cause >10% of
  otherwise buildable existing packages to fail.  Hope these checks get promoted