RE: Analysis of Mauve failures - The final chapter

[Andrew Haley <aph at cambridge dot redhat dot com>]

Thank you for the reminder.

Boehm, Hans writes:

 > As it stands, I'm hesitant to turn off the warnings by default, though
 > I can see arguments either way.  If the warnings occur repeatedly,
 > they are indicative of a potential memory leak.  If someone wants to
 > turn it off by default, and instead provide an environment variable to
 > turn it back on, I could probably be talked into that, too.

It seems to me that we have to make up our minds.

IMO:  If we are shipping a production-quality system then we shouldn't
output warnings about which we'll say "ah, don't worry about that
message, we already know about that."  It doesn't look good, and it
will suggest to people that we don't have a serious offering.  This is
especially true if the warning message uses obscure and frightening
terminology.  This warning message looks like something major has
failed.

Andrew.