[Geany-devel] Ideas on increasing quality of plugins

Frank Lanitz frank at xxxxx
Sat Mar 12 09:21:35 UTC 2011

On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 02:53:47 +0100
Colomban Wendling <lists.ban at herbesfolles.org> wrote:

> > Maaaybe, sort of see your point, but not really convinced that
> > uprating warnings to errors is a good idea on the dev codebase, it
> > stops people trying and testing things.
> Unfortunately, believe me that non-fatal warnings are use to be
> ignored by unexperienced programmers, believing that if their code
> compile it is then OK.
> And I don't see why a warning upgraded to an error on every build
> would be worst than a syntactical problem (as I described above
> previously)? In a typical situation, the developer who writes the
> plugin should get the warning (well, the error), see his plugin don't
> build, care (hopefully :D), and then fix it directly even before
> committing and then before anybody else could face the problem.
> Don't you think?

Just thinking about adding a flag which is activating a paranoid
check inside default build system and which lead into failing buildsin
such a case. This would give plugin devs the chance to fix their code
on one hand and unexperienced people which just want to test to have a
build they can do their stuff with. 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.geany.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20110312/470051e7/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Devel mailing list