Re: Getting collaberative maintainace up (Re: Upcoming NMU)
On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:54:43 +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar uttered
> <possibly dangerous (for me) rant>
> It always stroke me as odd that there exists both linda and lintian.
> Isn't it possible to have lintian include arbitrary executables as
> tests, so that python-only tests can be simply plugged into lintian, and
> then drop linda? AFAICS, the interface could be very simple: just echo
> the I/W/E: lines, and keep existing lintian structure.
>
Gee, way to just fob off over 2 years of work of mine. I feel so much
better knowing that my checks will be plugged into Lintian, and my
1,000 lines of base code will just be "dropped".
Anyway, Linda checks aren't just an executable script, like Lintian's
are. Spawning 120-odd processes doesn't strike me as the best
solution. Linda's checks must be execfile()'d by the base code, which
will register the checks in a registry, and then one by one, the
classes in the registry are instantiated and run.
> That would prevent a lot of double work... And easier for the user, as
> only one tool remains. And existing infrastructure like the global
> lintian check on the whole archive will for free feature the linda
> checks too then.
If you check, Linda checks are pretty much the same as the Lintian
checks, with silly checks dropped, and a few that have been merged,
and not so many false positives.
Thanks,
--
Steve
If it (dieting) was like a real time strategy game, I'd have loaded a save
game from ten years ago.
- Greg, Columbia Internet
Reply to: