Hi!

> >>  config WERROR
> >>         bool "Compile the kernel with warnings as errors"
> >>-       default y
> >>+       default COMPILE_TEST
> >
> >That seems reasonable. It very much is about build-testing.
> 
> That and 2 more things IMO:
> 
> a. having developers be responsible for build warnings, not just
>    build errors
> 
> b. having maintainers merge them more like they are build errors
>    and not just some warnings that can be overlooked.
> 
> I don't see enough of a. or b.  :(

Do we really want developers treat warnings as errors? When the code
is okay but some random version of gcc dislikes it...

Plus, there's question of stable. We already get ton of churn there
("this fixes random warning"). WERROR will only encourage that...

Best regards,
								Pavel
-- 
http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek