Hello Niels ! On 08/04/11 23:04, Niels Thykier wrote: >> Cool, will have a look (hopefully Friday). From my initial review I >> might split and merge some patches. The merge of my branch will wait >> until Tuesday, so I will do the changes required for the merge. If you >> could provide some test cases for these tags before then, that would be >> great. > > > Alright, I had a look and have merged the patches into 4 with some minor > code-style changes. Before I commit the patches, I would like some test > cases to go with them. Attached is a first draft that covers most of the checks (excepted two, I'll handle that later on). I'm just sending you additional patches with respect to what I sent already. > I see you have tested some of your tags[1]; I am curious about your > findings, you say that 30% of the javalibs you have tests triggers the > tags. Have you any ideas if any of those are false-positives? I'm afraid that in this specific case, chances of false positives are unlikely. If a java package depends on a lib...-java, it means that some of its code depend on one of the jars in this lib...-java. So it must have an appropriate classpath entry. It is a warning as of now, but I'm pretty sure they are all java policy violations, we may have to raise it into an error. The only possibility I see for false positives is if a package depends on the data contained in a lib...-java package, but not on the code. I don't think it applies to a significant fraction of these 30%... Cheers, Vincent -- Vincent Fourmond, Debian Developer http://vince-debian.blogspot.com/ Au royaume des aveugles, il y a des borgnes à ne pas dépasser. -- Soeur Marie-Thérèse des Batignoles (Maëster) Vincent, listening to The Hardest Button To Button (The White Stripes)
Attachment:
java-lintian-checks-2.tar.gz
Description: application/gzip