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

Re: broken .orig.tar.gz (Re: package upload rejected - no email)

Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> But I think it is a problem that such a thing was able to get in.
> As it is not a policy rule broken, I fear less that noone has even
> looked at the file. But the alternative of someone looking, realising this
> mistake and just letting it in anyway is not very conforting either.
(speaking only for myself)

While I personally try to take care to only upload pristine .orig.tar.gz for my
own packages (and even think that using the delete option might be preferable to
unpacking and packing again) I distinctly think that this is out of the scope of
NEW checking, so I do not check for it but only inspect the contents of the
orig.tar.gz diving into the top directory without paying attention to its name.
Rejecting for non-critical packaging issues would not only further increase the
reject ratio but also require a lot of additional work.
Maybe you should be more concerned that currently more than 1 in 10 packages are
rejected from NEW (according to some careless grepping of
merkel:/org/ftp.d.o/log/), quite a lot of these involve things that lintian
warns about or copyright (which really is only a matter of effort, not skills)
even without ftp-master insisting much on the lesser lintian-indicated problems.

Kind regards

Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/

Reply to: