This has been reported by the PVS-Studio team as Bug #1613662 [1]. I have added a "to do" list to the summary for anyone who is interested in working on this. Many should be easy fixes.
I have also requested a copy of the full analysis report.
AV
[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/1613662
On 16 August 2016 at 03:52, Martin Owens <doctormo@...400...> wrote:
On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 03:46 +0200, Sylvain Chiron wrote:
The page says ‘For this analysis, we used the latest version of Inkscape, 0.92, whose source codes can be downloaded from the GitHub repository’. We could tell them that, as our own analysis of their work — :) —, since the source code is not on GitHub yet, and the code for 0.92 probably won't be.
There are some clones on GitHub, some trial runs and some exports.
I think it weakens our developer trademark to have repositories that /look/ legit. A constant problem with github repositories as you can clone anything and your clone looks just like the blessed real thing.
It was a bad design choice for them to not have projects, some sort of trademark protection (even weak protection) some sort of project icon/identifiable mark and maybe even some more aggressive signing for authenticity sake.
But we have the options we have and none of them are great.
Martin,
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel