Re: Bug#663516: lintian: Should we retire old/reundant tags
On 2012-03-15 18:47, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org> writes:
>> * Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>, 2012-03-11, 15:29:
>
>>> Are we sure that no one is going to do a manual binNMU and not know the
>>> new versioning system? We still do get occasional manual binNMUs.
>
>> I estimate that the number of people who still remember the old style and
>> haven't heard of the new style, and feel adventurous to upload binNMUs
>> built by hand is about 0.
>
> Yeah, you're probably right.
>
>> Anyway, I believe such a binNMU would be rejected by dak (because it
>> couldn't find source for such version).
>
> If that's the case, then I'm definitely fine with dropping this check.
>
> I think there's a pending patch for Policy that was most of the way
> through the process that would document our version number conventions
> more completely. I should dig that up.
>
Hi,
I asked in #d-ftp:
"""
14:31 < nthykier> Hey, how would dak handle an "old-style" binNMU
versioning (context #663516#31 and #663516#36)
14:35 * DktrKranz looks at the "old-style" versioning
14:37 < DktrKranz> at a first sight, it should be a reject for missing
source, but lemme check.
14:37 < Ganneff> reject
14:38 < Ganneff> non matching regex
[...]
14:39 < Ganneff> (and through that, missing source, si)
"""
So I will remove the tag.
~Niels
Reply to: