Bug#993813: warn about known invalid fields in debian/upstream/metadata
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 2:26 PM Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer@debian.org> wrote:
>
> It won't provide maintainers of packages that use
> invalid settings that they are. Isn't that purpose of lintian?
I am not sure. Is it perhaps a gray zone the Janitor could fill?
There are a few open questions: Why for example does the Github signup
page occur so often in the archive? [1] Do we actually need the field?
[2] I am not even sure the reference is incorrect. What if an upstream
manages bug reports via Github's issue tracker, like gocryptfs? [3]
(Please don't worry—I did not set the Registration field there. [4])
To be sure, I am not opposed to your suggestion in principle, but
people do a lot of weird stuff. Is the obscure (and often ignored)
upstream metadata really worth our attention?
> Or, looking at a counter-example - there is e.g. a pypi-homepage
> tag; not just a homepage classification.
I think there is a difference. A project's home page is often the
first point of contact, especially in search of documentation. When do
people look at the Registration field in the upstream metadata,
please?
Kind regards
Felix Lechner
[1] https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fjoin&literal=1&perpkg=1
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata
[3] https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs
[4] https://sources.debian.org/src/gocryptfs/1.8.0-1/debian/upstream/metadata/
Reply to: