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