From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0689F1F597 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2018 17:19:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728205AbeHDTUZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Aug 2018 15:20:25 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com ([209.85.221.68]:41844 "EHLO mail-wr1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727953AbeHDTUZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Aug 2018 15:20:25 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id j5-v6so8314864wrr.8 for ; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 10:19:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=+Mk2iSvIVhIeJsEd2Wqzny0TM83uPuHP4iSoyvwK4/c=; b=P9u4kudgM8QfN2ND0HMB956hSyXEMy2+ZL0RoMn7mE+1cprv5ybTuHUqlsDzZ8mGHw 4TO5AAr3gJRppa5BOiTI5yzyeNfiURKOy8WLTIqmXsXFM+t/DDA8cWe0P6Fhuhh41Epa DtzrU07119VRH7VxEcbcFwylkRDcsB6RQp6KM/WsG9bJlcR10Dr3kqedFDDYMG8q+0rX IWehKWh2/QZeNgrmdz7E7ekj9lfLSLRtRcHubqB9nx2VuEHyjxxI7KB5E9ZelC2LJbFd sq/KEKxCSpXkSc5LsJeIBLy9trbcw6yQyYb8XIdPTgP/mf6IILDdaSIZCeZZSIoVa93P iOQw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=+Mk2iSvIVhIeJsEd2Wqzny0TM83uPuHP4iSoyvwK4/c=; b=RsBCHtY9iswzbU6d5EQpwM46igzEOAqxnMcIwJ3gQrF50eXCAygvErOueOSrQRpvSV YkTr4m2nCY7vFHcljy0+5TsnAnMqJETgOMzLPcIyJ95tn5UISn0X4x16k1Xs7tVoR/Wx TdytVxG9BHsLFqOU6rJV+rtu7B5VtjpkFcCLbXHe+jOMC/+D2ZQemlKinlp33/FO3+DA FRbu/TC67b4npUxVQfxK3O9YN9jQWUnd1HJnXwEAOCNzPY6vZvqlAkQTbNpRgWzQkQAs vnFgEf/mQLYKXuMtiJzWsUjSU2FFyyGlggxiFiRnZ+rW2KR18+MsOR0m7DESzedhysMH oXFQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlG/uLA8xAeEaQyqqWI0pReDFdT0zlp19KTOeDWtlEI41D2Yhy0c KNB8crFSx3BJCWfjzFommqM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpf//ZkCFYJvvLGhc2SnQzcXwi4lwVVliCs23R+g2/8WRMKemsK+SaIJ0wo9ASkyQATxIHGoAg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:b2f4:: with SMTP id g107-v6mr5687430wrd.53.1533403143447; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 10:19:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (168.50.187.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.187.50.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s16-v6sm5334003wrq.20.2018.08.04.10.19.02 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sat, 04 Aug 2018 10:19:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Duy Nguyen Cc: Jonathan Nieder , Stefan Beller , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Git Mailing List , git-packagers@googlegroups.com, Han-Wen Nienhuys Subject: Re: [PATCH] Makefile: enable DEVELOPER by default References: <20180804020009.224582-1-sbeller@google.com> <20180804020255.225573-1-sbeller@google.com> <20180804060928.GB55869@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2018 10:19:02 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Duy Nguyen's message of "Sat, 4 Aug 2018 08:38:14 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Duy Nguyen writes: > On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 8:11 AM Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> My main concern is not about them but about other >> people building from source in order to run (instead of to develop) >> Git, and by extension, the people they go to for help when it doesn't >> work. I have lots of bitter experience of -Werror being a support >> headache and leading to bad workarounds when someone upgrades their >> compiler and the build starts failing due to a new warning it has >> introduced. > > Even old compilers can also throw some silly, false positive warnings > (which now turn into errors) because they are not as smart as new > ones. I agree with both of the above. I do not think the pros-and-cons are in favor of forcing the developer bit to everybody, even though I am sympathetic to the desire to see people throw fewer bad changes that waste review bandwidth by not compiling or passing its own tests at us.