Re: Lintian based autorejects
(On vacation with intermittant access, so may not see responses for a
while.)
Ryan Niebur <ryan@debian.org> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:03:06PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 03:59:52PM -0700, Ryan Niebur wrote:
>>> I completely disagree with this lintian warning and prefer to use
>>> "Author(s)".
>> I do agree that rejecting on this is probably excessive but I'm curious
>> as to why you think it's incorrect?
> I prefer "Author(s)". Less text to update when a new author is
> added. It does no harm and affects nothing in the end result. I'm
> curious as to why you think "Author(s)" is a bad thing?
Please note that the intention of the Lintian tag is not to complain about
people using "Author(s)", but to catch people who have used dh-make and
then never completed the relevant section of the resulting
debian/copyright file, which I think we would all agree is an obvious RC
bug.
As a Lintian maintainer, I would certainly welcome refinements of the
regex that tries to detect this case. I suspect any of Ryan's packages
caught by this are false positives, which as with any false positive
except for the well-defined cases where overrides are explicitly requested
(such as setuid programs) is a bug in Lintian. As with any bug, it may be
more or less easy to fix.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: