Bug#793503: lintian: Please warn on obsolete URLs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Am 2015-08-25 um 16:20 schrieb Jakub Wilk:
> Hi Riku!
>
> * Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>, 2015-08-24, 11:00:
>> These obsolete urls are already checked with duck[1][2]. I think
>> what would make sense would be to make lintian recommend duck.
>> Then lintian can run duck if it has been installed.
>
> Leaving aside privacy issues, that would make Lintian output
> dependent on external world, which would be against its design
> constraints: https://lintian.debian.org/manual/section-1.3.html
>
> So I'm afraid we can't run duck, at least not by default.
>
I fully agree with that, my original intent (before i made duck as a
seperate tool) was to integrate URL checks into lintian as new check
modules. But this is currently a no-go.
Because there are currently way more projects with e.g.
code.google.com based URLS than there are packages with issues (e.g.
404, no repo exported,...) reported by duck, i will extend the duck
website to list packages grouped by domain and post this on debian-devel
.
Especially for code.google.com this is somewhat urgent, as of [1], excer
t:
"
March 12, 2015 - New project creation disabled.
August 24, 2015 - The site goes read-only. You can still
checkout/view project source, issues, and wikis.
January 25, 2016 - The project hosting service is closed. You will
be able to download a tarball of project source, issues, and wikis.
These tarballs will be available throughout the rest of 2016.
"
This would eventually raise some attention and help to prevent bitrod.
Simon
[1]
http://google-opensource.blogspot.fi/2015/03/farewell-to-google-code.htm
l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=hQx4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: