Re: Bug#420160: please allow to drop version constraint in B-D when it's in stable
Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:
> There's an 'informational' level below 'warning' in lintian, right?
> Perhaps versioned deps that are only relevant to oldstable could be
> dropped from W/E to I?
Okay, that's two votes for dropping it to I. :) I'll take a closer look
at what would be involved in adding the infrastructure to keep the
warnings around at the I level for oldstable stuff. It should be easy
with debconf and x11-common and relatively easy with debhelper. quilt and
a few other things will be harder, but I may drop those if I don't see an
easy way of doing it.
Any reason to keep anything around for versions prior to oldstable, or
should that just go away?
> The reason I think this is advisable is that the net impact of not
> having the versioned dep is approximately zero, and many maintainers
> give a high priority to having lintian-clean packages. In the absence
> of particular user demand for oldstable backports, I think their time is
> better spent elsewhere than on this class of error.
Yup, that's my feeling on it too.
> From a releasability standpoint, the fact that SETTITLE and error
> templates are now supported by all implementors of debconf in stable
> means that an explicit dependency is no longer needed. But I don't
> imagine this is the last extension that will ever be added to debconf,
> so wouldn't it be nice if the debconf implementors would agree on
> additional virtual packages to provide as each new extension comes
> along? E.g., Provides: debconf-2.0, debconf-error, or Provides:
> debconf-2.0, debconf-2.0.1?
Yes, that would be very nice.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: