Bug#930679: Please add overridable tag for not using dh sequencer

[Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Felix" == Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com> writes:

    Felix> Hi Sam,
    Felix> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 8:45 AM Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote:
    >> 
    >> I'd recommend starting out with warning.  Some day it might move
    >> to error, but I think starting out there would be overly
    >> aggressive.

    Felix> Can we please make it an I: tag first? A Lintian warning may
    Felix> unleash an angry mob on us. After a transition period, during
    Felix> which people have adjusted their packages and had time to
    Felix> evaluate their options, we can transition to W, and perhaps
    Felix> even E.

I'm getting really uncomfortable with this discussion.  I've said a
number of times that this is the lintian maintainer's call to make.  It
sounds like you want to make a call different than the one I'd make.
OK.  But I also feel like I'm getting a lot of pressure to believe
differently than I do.  That you're going beyond "hey we disagree with
you," into "hey we need you to abandon your position and surrender to
ours."

I don't personally think this is useful as an i: tag: I don't tend to
look at those when looking at what changes I need to make in my packages
(only in trying to understand what Lintian thinks about my package or
another), and I suspect there are a bunch of maintainers like me.

But the lintian maintainers have a heck of a lot more experience than I
do about lintian and what they need to do to introduce new stuff.
This is an area where maintainer's privilege should be maintained.

But I don't think it's fair to ask me to abandon my position to make
forward progress.

--Sam