DPDK CI discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* spell check
@ 2021-11-16  8:54 Thomas Monjalon
  2021-11-16 13:46 ` Lincoln Lavoie
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2021-11-16  8:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ci

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?



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: spell check
  2021-11-16  8:54 spell check Thomas Monjalon
@ 2021-11-16 13:46 ` Lincoln Lavoie
  2021-11-16 13:51   ` Thomas Monjalon
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Lincoln Lavoie @ 2021-11-16 13:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: ci

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.

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.

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 3:54 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> 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?
>
>
>

-- 
*Lincoln Lavoie*
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
<https://www.iol.unh.edu>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: spell check
  2021-11-16 13:46 ` Lincoln Lavoie
@ 2021-11-16 13:51   ` Thomas Monjalon
  2021-11-16 14:33     ` Aaron Conole
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2021-11-16 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Lincoln Lavoie; +Cc: ci

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 <thomas@monjalon.net> 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?




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: spell check
  2021-11-16 13:51   ` Thomas Monjalon
@ 2021-11-16 14:33     ` Aaron Conole
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2021-11-16 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: Lincoln Lavoie, ci

Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:

> 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.

I'll make sure to ask about it.

>> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 3:54 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> 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?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-11-16 14:33 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-11-16  8:54 spell check Thomas Monjalon
2021-11-16 13:46 ` Lincoln Lavoie
2021-11-16 13:51   ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-11-16 14:33     ` Aaron Conole

DPDK CI discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/ci/0 ci/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 ci ci/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/ci \
		ci@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index ci

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.ci


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git