[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0019 Swift Testing (Package Manager)
max.howell at apple.com
Tue Jan 5 17:16:12 CST 2016
> On Jan 5, 2016, at 3:15 PM, Paul Cantrell <cantrell at pobox.com> wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2016, at 5:11 PM, Max Howell <max.howell at apple.com> wrote:
>>> Now lint … lint I’m not sure about. It’s problematic as soon as you try to establish a standard, as we’ve already established on this list in the “mandatory self” discussion. The truth is that I don’t care about a third party lib’s weird formatting decisions nearly as much as I care about its tests passing.
>> Here by “lint” I mean packaging concerns for linting, specifically: is the semantic version the package claims *correct*. Code standards are not part of the publishing lint step as indeed, this seems excessive and not a decision for us to make.
> Ah, that makes much more sense! Sorry for being slow on the uptake. Yes, programmatic validation of semantic versioning seems like a fine idea.
np, I should have been more specific.
More information about the swift-evolution