Re: NEW processing
Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I submit that lintian warnings are entirely out of scope for the task the
> project has entrusted to the ftp team, and that mentioning this at all as a
> factor in making the NEW queue "painless" indicates there's a problem with
> the process as implemented.
> - lintian *warnings* are those points that even the lintian maintainers are
> not confident are always indicative of bugs. There's really no reason for
> the ftp team to look at these as a condition for NEW acceptance.
Minor correction: lintian warnings are those points that the Lintian
maintainers are either not confident are indicative of bugs or indicate
bugs that are not severity important or higher.
> - Even with lintian errors, there are many that are definitely bugs but
> which should not be grounds for a reject from the archive because they're
> *minor* bugs, and the ftp team should not be in the business of enforcing
> lintian cleanness as a condition of acceptance into the archive because
> this is (and always will be) a false measure of package quality.
There should be no minor-severity bugs that result in lintian errors. If
there are, that's a bug in Lintian. Please report it. The lowest
threshold that produces an E tag is severity: important, likelihood:
The severity classifications are new, based on a GSoC project by Jordà
Polo (who did an excellent job), and have only been checked over
comprehensively a few times. There may be misclassifications remaining,
which we'd be happy to fix.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>