Re: couple of patches
Russ Allbery wrote:
[...]
>
> I applied this patch because it's an improvement over what we had
> previously, but I think you misread my message.
Indeed :-/
> What I'm saying is that
> *all* of that data that you moved from one place to another should be in
> Lintian::Data. I want to get away from having these big static hashes in
> the check scripts where we can and move that data into Lintian::Data,
> where it's easier to edit and understand. The same is true of all the
> simple lists that's currently in the check/* scripts and didn't move.
> (The regexes and the more complex data structures, such as the
> interpreters in checks/scripts, probably need to stay Perl.)
I can't think of any of the regexes fitting better in data/ than in the
check script itself, but in case there is one Lintian::Data should be
regex-aware in the sense that it should use qr as possible as to minimise
the performance penalty.
>
> But we don't have to do all of that right now and I definitely agree that
> this is an improvement. It also brings us fairly close to eliminating
> common_data.pm, which I've wanted to do for a while. Then we won't need
> those extra use libs that are easy to forget and will be closer to having
> a real module structure.
>
Sure.
Cheers,
--
Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer
www.debian.org - get.debian.net
Reply to: