John Maddock wrote:
Andreas Huber wrote:
John Maddock wrote: [snip]
What should we do about the *LC* problems? Is it worth bothering with those? Um, don't know, in theory yes, but there are a lot truly trivial issues showing up, for example there are dozens of html redirect files, that have no content except a http-refresh redirection, we could just mark these so they don't show up in the report I guess? Sure, how can I mark them?
I don't remember and I can't find it in the docs :-(
You may have to dig into the source or ask Rene!
Use "boostinspect:nolicense" or "boostinspect:nocpoyright". But...
What about the People pages? Do they need license and copyright or should we just mark them too?
Yep I guess they do need license and copyright.
All files, including the redirection files, need copyright and license, legally it's what's best.
Aren't people automatically nagged about this anyway? If not I can surely do some personalized nagging :-).
I think the messages are only going to the mailing list at present.
Correct.
I guess in order of importance we need to fix:
1) Regressions. 2) Coding guidelines violations (min/max/namespaces etc). 3) Missing copyright on source files. 4) Broken links in docs. 5) Everything else :-)
Seems right.
Oh and somewhere into all that, we need to decide whether users will be building 1.34 with bbv2 or bbv1.
Given that we haven't been doing regressions with BBv1 I think we've already decided that we'll be building with BBv2. One area of help I would appreciate on this one would be user level testing of the build+install on the various platforms.
If the former then we need a new set of getting started instructions at a minimum.
Dave has been promising he is working on those. In case you want to nag him directly ;-) -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo