On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 2:02 AM Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 10:38:43AM -0700, Emily Shaffer wrote: > > +* If you rely on Git avoiding a specific pattern that doesn't work well with > > + your platform (like a certain malloc pattern), raise it on the mailing list. > > + There are a few ways to avoid these breakages, so we'll work case-by-case to > > + find a solution that doesn't unnecessarily constrain other platforms to keep > > + compatibility with yours. > > I found the latter part of this bullet point a bit weird. We don't yet > know about the specific pattern that may fail on any future supported > platform, so claiming that there are ways to avoid them goes a bit too > far, no? I guess I had in mind "some entry in contrib/ that happens at compile time" or "some preprocessor define hack that happens at compile time" or "???", which is where I got "a few" from. I can drop it, it is wordy and "we want to work with you to find something that doesn't suck for everyone" is the important part. Thanks. > > > +** Include a comment with an expiration date for these tests no more than 1 year > > + from now. You can update the expiration date if your platform still needs > > + that assurance down the road, but we need to know you still care about that > > + compatibility case and are working to make it unnecessary. > > Do we maybe want to replace "from now" with "from when you add them"? Sure, thanks. > > Other than that this document looks great to me, thanks! Thanks for the review. - Emily > > Patrick
