Re: jk/unused-annotation + ab/unused-annotation
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 31, 2022, 17:21 UTC
- Message-ID
- <220831.86tu5s8h1a.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqr10wgz64.fsf@gitster.g>
On Wed, Aug 31 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 11 quoted lines
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: > >> Yeah, I think we should use the deprecated attribute. Since the original >> has been reverted, I think the next step would be for me to fix up the >> patches to use that approach from the start, and re-submit. >> >> I was dragging my feet a little hoping that we might get some coccinelle >> parsing miracle in the interim. > > Yup, that was why I ignored the "deprecated" one when I dealt with > the replacement series yesterday.
Ah, even if that's the case we'd need to start requiring bleeding-edge spatch, which doesn't seem practical to me, and would reduce the audience for our rules.
Or we'd need to split off the "bleeding edge" rules, or something...