On Sat, Dec 26, 2015 at 12:20:21PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Following my blog post yesterday with updated graphs about Debian
> packaging evolution[1], I prepared lists of packages for each kind of
> "outdatedness". Of course not all practices highlighted below are
> deprecated, and there are good reasons to continue to do some of them.
> But still, given that they all represent a clear minority of packages, I
> thought that it would be useful to list the related packages. (I
> honestly didn't know if some of my packages would show up in the lists!)
>
> The lists are available at https://people.debian.org/~lucas/qa-20151226/
oh, cool!
> qa-helper_classic_debhelper.txt (3647 packages)
>
> The package is still using "classic" debhelper (no dh, no CDBS).
A package of mine (libreoffice-dictionaries) is listed in .ddlist, but
not in .txt, how could it be?
Also, libreoffice-dictionaries was born using only dh, never used
classic debhelper.
Why is it listed there?
> qa-vcs_more_than_one_declared_vcs.txt (1 package)
>
> The package declares more than one VCS.
This one was so weird that I had a looked at it, discovered one of the
Vcs-* pointed to the upstream git repo, that's wrong so I've filed
#809034 :)
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
more about me: http://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature