On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 03:06:07PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> As there are certain lintian tags that should only appear in very rare
> cases we have created two categories. The first is named "warning", tags
<snip>
> The second category is named "error" and the tags listed can not be
> overridden. Those are tags corresponding to packaging errors serious
On a second read of the proposal, it occurred to me (and a handful of
other DDs in private communications agreed) that the above naming choice
of "warning" and "error" can be a bit unfortunate. In fact, lintian
already has its own notion of warning/error and having the naming
overloaded by dak messages that are based on lintian outcome can be
quite confusing.
Can you please consider changing the above naming?
The first alternative naming that comes to my mind is "non-fatal errors"
vs "fatal errors". It is not particularly exciting as a choice, but I
believe it would be better than warning/error.
Thanks in advance,
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature