[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Lintian severity levels



Antoine Le Gonidec:
Le Sat, Sep 27, 2025 at 09:41:58AM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine a écrit :
IMHO, in order for Lintian's severity levels to be meaningful in
determining a package's fitness for inclusion in the Debian
repository, an Error ought to refer to a MUST[NOT] Policy item, while
a Warning ought to refer to a SHOULD[NOT] Policy item.

I second this suggestion, keeping in mind that in some cases it might be
better to update the Policy instead of lintian.


Coming from another angle, what is the problem you are trying to solve by re-calibrating all the severity levels? To me, this declaration smells like a "solution" but I am not sure I understand the "problem" it is supposed to solve.


[...]
IMHO, During the Forky cycle, an extensive review of Lintian's
severity levels for every tag ought to be performed, starting with
those for which a bug report against Lintian has been filed.

Assuming that your proposal is seconded by more people, and especially
by the current lintian maintainers, would you volunteer to send patches
fixing the severity level of tags? Or at least take an active part in
preparing these patches?

Or don’t you have the right mix of time/motivation/skill for that, and
should it be seen more as a suggestion for the lintian maintainers
themselves?

Reminder here, Debian is a do-cracy. If you make this kind of declaration, you have to be ready to put your volunteer time where your mouth is. Having a lot of people on debian-devel saying something is a good idea is worthless if no one steps up to actually do it.

And I am definitely **not** volunteering for this even if I would be convinced it was a good idea.

Best regards,
Niels

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: