[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Opinions needed: reporting lintian overrides

On Saturday 5 January 2008 14:43, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> As you might expect (as I was the requester for this feature) I'd
> *really* prefer the former option. My initial reasoning for it is that
> I want to make it immediately visible to sponsors if a package has
> suppressed lintian warnings. If it's not the default behaviour to list
> them, then I'd be worried that some people just won't notice.

I think that a sponsor should review candidate packages more than just running 
lintian over them. If I get a completely new package to review I examine at 
least all files in the debian/ dir closely. If it's an update to a package I 
sponsored before, I at least debdiff it with the archive version, then added 
overrides would come up aswell.

Wrong overrides should be caught by proper package review. Sometimes one slips 
through - bad luck then, it's not the end of the world. I don't think that 
lintian should be verbose about legitimate attempts to make it less verbose. 
It defeats the point, really.


Attachment: pgpbsAt_e_ONv.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: