Re: Possible mass bug filing: non-doc packages recommending doc packages
Giacomo Catenazzi <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Y Giridhar Appaji Nag wrote:
>> Would there be any objections to filing minor/wishlist bugs against
>> these packages? I am including a tentative dd-list corresponding to
>> the packages  that I found after manually removing some packages
>> . I will modify it based on suggestions.
> I think that lintian warning is the right way to do it.
I don't -- I think there are too many false positives for a lintian
warning given the thread. I also think this is fundamentally going in
the wrong direction. Wouldn't our users expect to get the documentation
with many of these packages by default? Normally you do get some
documentation with things, and I've always been surprised by, say, ntp
not including any documentation without installing a separate package.
> As we see, there are a lot of "false positives", so an eventual mass
> bug filling will require a lot of manual check before filling the bug
> (yes, I think the main task in this case should be on the reporter,
> not on the maintainer).
If there are too many false positives for a mass bug filing, there are
probably too many false positives for a Lintian check.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>