Re: [boost] Coverity Static Code Analysis

Subject: Re: [boost] Coverity Static Code Analysis
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-04 11:16:04

>> Well, since you brought up the issue... I'm not a lawyer either,
>> but I'd *not* agree to anything like:
>>
>>   Coverity may, in its sole discretion, modify or revise these
>>   terms and conditions and policies at any time, and you agree
>>   to be bound by such modifications or revisions.
>>
>> That's the fourth line of text, and I quitted reading. (Does
>> this have a name? "You'll agree with me for the eternity,
>> whatever I'll say"... Perhaps "The God Almighty Pact"?)
>
> Wow, that's pretty draconian, I must say!

None the less quite a number of very well known projects seem to have 
accepted it: perl, gcc, gdb, tcl etc etc.

Personally I *would* rather like to see Boost put through a static analysis 
tool on a regular basis: so I'm wondering if we should bite the bullet and 
sign up for this?

John.