Bug#731340: lintian: [new check] Check if debian/upstream files are valid YAML
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Am 2014-07-05 11:03, schrieb Niels Thykier:
> On 2013-12-04 14:04, Simon Kainz wrote:
>> Package: lintian Version: 2.5.10.4 Severity: wishlist Tags:
>> patch
>>
>>
>> After processing some debian/upstream whic hcontained
>> broken/invalid YAML data, i created the following check together
>> with tille@debian.org:
>>
>> if debian/upstream is not avail -> pedantic warning Invalid
>> YAML -> "normal" warning YAML with
>> invalid field -> "normal" warning
>>
>> Please see my attached file.
>>
>> Would be nice if this could be integrated into lintian.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> Thanks for taking the time to write a patch and sorry for the long
> delay in getting back to you. We already commented on your patch a
> while ago, but unfortunately, you were never added to the recipient
> list of those mails ...
>
> Our primary concern with your patch is that it relies on
> "Test::YAML" and "Test::More", which are modules only used for
> testing code (e.g. build time tests).
>
> Beyond that, there are two additional improvements worth
> considering: * Adding a test case for your new checks / tags *
> Moving the (contents of) "@allowed_fields" into a data file.
>
> ~Niels
>
>
Hi Nils,
Thanks for your reply! I'll try to get rid of the Test::*
dependencies. Test cases should be no problem, i'll dig my way though
lintian source to copy/paste/learn from some bits.
Concerning "moving allowed_fields data into a data file": Is there
some kind of infrastructure/guideline for this? I saw
/usr/share/lintian/data and though about putting the allowd_fields
data in there. Is the the right way?
Regards,
Simon
- --
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/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=Mck9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: