From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12FFBA0032 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:51:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA5B140141; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:51:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B107440040 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:51:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D60A5C019B; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 08:51:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 16 Nov 2021 08:51:12 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm2; bh= 0ydO2ETXQijCgl/J8JA2xLyPV6mkJcwaQVq+++7uSCY=; b=Y1aWC0ysQfjyWKea desGGd3n3LWIJxM9aqXtlXRIv6lrVtLRR3iP1Tbx3muu9K3kcs13hmohYqVixQeZ B2jgLrO+bD1b22lvre7Ns314c3T/pnscNVUW7xPFkHciOgrEdKGzgLIGjonUoPIt YGJHJPZcs7Q3CrfB8JUkyXiyFfUtlnBGV+5GqzjKzQ1s4qaterKPirGQxeOtLzKR 2//i/VWIq3cMnzH59SdZuMbcn2Gbru0FnvYtE7fx0ejOcEYderi/Jwtc9DDSBe8O VtZQWkxa6kDzw8h4vc3or+q6IYSrqOLbSGDmYZ64uEFL+IROdLTo7VyK4A/B/KcT D2nfEQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=0ydO2ETXQijCgl/J8JA2xLyPV6mkJcwaQVq+++7uS CY=; b=ZXf90JsuYhYJVE1Xtm07bgV+H/0jHdcM7BybfvA1VrdEA+Qk58GBI+mea myejdwVn7K61j8EBcAdRx9Aq+Kf2g8hkHdXdeWHYMvAaOOaPlLSkmOPa57wSKQCO RLUJuZfmzRfCQdiftblOiz4mjsiq/8N92uU+RRx6XanauNHC/UCXC/WQsqi090lj kKYevqb+95XGGrzEtvi+PEy4EcV4VywlagwAIv1YJ1+GrI7R4XusM9wqnrrS3Yh8 +BgrbtIrx4Ru31Io3qGCNGgST3lpjqwlctM36kTzTRjB5TRVdjTnm7pJ+K33bxzm 6UTdHaHcWMChRT9KmU97Y+dLSwgSg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvuddrfedvgdehhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdejueei iedvffegheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhroh hmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 08:51:11 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Lincoln Lavoie Cc: ci@dpdk.org Subject: Re: spell check Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:51:10 +0100 Message-ID: <6042854.nMU7bvWPEF@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <1756614.3rAJA5Eeto@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org 16/11/2021 14:46, Lincoln Lavoie: > Hi Thomas, > > This has been disabled in the lab. I think it should be possible to get > to a base state where there aren't errors, it just requires getting past > all of the acronyms and other "strange" (to a spell checker's prospective) > parts of the documentation, like function names / prototypes, etc. There will be always new exceptions. It looks more worry than benefit. > Part of the idea behind putting the spell checker scripts, and more > importantly the dictionary and exceptions, into the devtools would be to > allow the community to manage that list of exceptions, etc. I'm not sure it's good to add this requirement on contributors. Anyway that's a topic for techboard meeting. > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 3:54 AM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > After some thoughts, I think it is not reasonable to check spelling > > in the CI, because we will always have false positives. > > > > Please could we disable "ci/iol-spell-check-testing" to avoid warnings?