Bug#1007002: lintian: transition to "pointed hints" has invalidated many overrides
Control: unblock 1006348 by -1
On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 at 05:15:19 +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:
> And #1007002 is only (!) about design decision to change nearly all
> tag formats involving file paths and line numbers. It has nothing to
> do with the other two real bugs and I have no idea why they have been
> merged.
I agree with your reasoning for unmerging, and I don't understand why
they were merged either.
#1007002 was marked as blocking #1006348 "lintian: Tag
improbable-bug-number-in-closes condition considers 7-digit bug numbers
improbable", but I think that was a side-effect of the merge and I don't
consider #1007002 to be RC or a blocker for #1006348, so I'm removing
that metadata.
> Since at least I will not revert such huge changes, I'll tag #1007002
> as "wontfix" for now and downgrade it to its original severity.
>
> We can continue working on that bug report if we find someone who
> either will work on reverting all the related work (although I think,
> it's both, too late and also probably way too much work given all the
> other recent changes) or, probably much better, provide either a
> migration script or some code which also accepts the old override
> formats. In that case, I'd remove the "wontfix" again. (Sorry, Simon,
> I generally agree with #1007002, but we currently have way more severe
> issues with Lintian than #1007002. Hence I also didn't remove the
> confirmed tag.)
That makes sense to me. I should have reported #1007002 earlier (or,
ideally, a Lintian co-maintainer should have pointed out the problems with
a major tag format transition before it got that far), which would have
made pausing or reverting the transition lower-cost.
Getting a new Lintian release into testing and backports would at least
mitigate #1007002 by making sure that maintainers can write one tag format
that is equally valid for stable-backports Lintian, testing Lintian,
unstable Lintian and lintian.debian.org.
Thank you for picking up this package! It's an important QA tool and
I'm glad someone is looking after it again.
smcv
Reply to: