Bug#991533: lintian: please forget about required-field Standards-Version for udeb packages

[Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Sean" == Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> writes:


    Sean> On Thu 12 Aug 2021 at 11:47PM +02, Cyril Brulebois wrote:

    >> Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> (2021-08-12):
    >>> On Tue 27 Jul 2021 at 08:41AM -06, Sam Hartman wrote:
    >>> 
    >>> >
    >>> > So, it seems fairly obvious to me that Standards-Version is
    >>> important > for packages that produce both debs and udebs.  >
    >>> I'm assuming the focus of our discussion then is on source
    >>> packages that > only produce udebs.  > Have I got that right?
    >>> >
    >>> > By definition, most of the policy that affects binary packages
    >>> does not > inherently apply to udebs.  As I understand it,
    >>> that's kind of the point > of udebs.
    >>> 
    >>> Would you agree with this?  You're only asking to stop seeing
    >>> warnings about S-V for source packages which produce only udebs?
    >> 
    >> Yes, that looks good to me: source packages (also) producing debs
    >> would deserve a rightful nag.

    Sean> I believe that we failed to consider udebs when we made the
    Sean> change which made S-V mandatory.  I propose we remove the
    Sean> requirement for S-V in udebs and source packages producing
    Sean> only udebs, until and unless someone provides a positive
    Sean> argument why S-V ought to be mandatory in these cases too.

I thought I provided such an argument.
(you trimmed that part of my message when replying).
My argument was roughly that  things like build systems, use of dh,
debian/rules interfaces etc might well need to apply to source packages
producing only udebs.
I think the issues are kind of complex,  and I agree with you that we
didn't consider udebs properly.

I do think though that you ignored the meat of my message and I think it
is worth a bit more consideration than that.