Re: [DRAFT] Upcoming changes in lintian & some bits
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 2011-02-20 07:16, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> [to be sent after 2.5.0 is uploaded to experimental]
>
> Overrides breakage
> ==================
>
> [...]
>
> We expect auto rejections to be disabled for the affected, non-fatal, tags
> for a while to give a grace period of time for this transition.
> Lintian 2.4.0, currently in experimental, has a list of tags we expect to be
^^^^^
2.5.0?
> used for auto rejections after the grace period of time. --ftp-master-
> rejects can be used to only check for those tags.
>
> [...]
Hey,
Did we want to upload 2.5.0 to experimental or a 2.5.0 pre-release? I
seem to recall Russ wanted to do it as a pre-release/release candidate,
but I cannot find any references to it. It may be prudent in the case
that we need to break another override (e.g. we missed a tag that still
reports files with wrong prefix)
Maybe we should urge people to review and give feedback on the accuracy
and severity of some of the new tags. Possibly "selling" a bit on what
kind of tags we have added in a short "high level" manner (e.g. Python
Policy checks, Java Dependency checks, etc.).
Finally, did we want to drop all the "versioned depends" from tags, if
the version is satisfied in Squeeze? If so, perhaps we should drop the
"missing dh depends for override targets", plus all the dh_* commands
listed in the "%versions" hash in checks/debhelper. (Re: #612137)
~Niels
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=TLsY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: