Re: proposed MBF: packages still using source format 1.0
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 11:39:04AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
Hi Andreas,
> Am Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 11:42:42PM +0200 schrieb Adrian Bunk:
>...
> > lintian already warns or has info tags that should be upgraded to warning,
>
> I absolutely agree here.
>
> > and then there will be slow migrations usually happening when someone
> > anyway does (and tests!) larger packaging changes.
>
> This "someone anyway does larger packaging changes" did not seem very
> probable for the packages I've touched (see my other mail in this
> thread).
>
> > Ensuring that all relevant lintian tags are warnings would be the
> > appropriate action (which is not yet true[1]), but there is no urgency
> > on getting everything "fixed" immediately.
>
> I agree that there is no real urgency for immediate action - but this
> seemed to be the case for other bugs on the packages I've touched the
> case as well.
what time frame do you have in mind when you write "no real urgency"
and "did not seem very probable"?
For me a reasonable time frame for changes that are neither urgent nor
supposed to create user-visible changes in the binary packages would be
to ensure it is a lintian warning now, and then wait 10 years.
Many maintainers touch their packages at least once per release cycle
and also check lintian warnings, so many packages will get fixed within
the next 1-2 years.
Most packages will get a new maintainer or a new team member in an
existing maintainance team within the next 10 years, and with the
help of a lintian warning this is the natural time for doing such
changes.
> Kind regards
>
> Andreas.
>...
cu
Adrian
Reply to: