Re: RFS: ampache (updated package)
On Tue, Oct 20 2009, George Danchev wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 20 2009, Paul Wise wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Jan Hauke Rahm <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> >> In future check your packages with 'lintian -IE --pedantic *.changes' to
>> >> catch minor issues. But the package looks good! :)
>> > Personally, I use this as it catches more things and gives more detail:
>> > lintian --info --display-info --display-experimental --pedantic
>> > --show-overrides --checksums --color
>> I find that experimental and pedantic add far too much
>> irrelevant chatter, and that it tends to mask the problems one should
>> actually fix.
> Then split'em up and use on demand. For instance, use one shell
> alias for 'must fix these', when done use another one for 'pedantic'
> mode, if you like to, which should be enough to demask lintian
> I think that experimenting with experimental/pedantic and
> eventually report results to BTS could help lintian developers to
> evaluate some information in advance about future infiltration and
> impact of these experimental checks, how useful, robust, or eventually
> boring they are, so they tweak the development heading according to
> the 'wind conditions'.
If you want to help improve lintian, sure. If you have the
experience and the patience, that is great. But suggesting it to a
bunch of novices trying to learn how to create packages might notbe the
best advice -- the experimental stuff is not something that is
necessarily things that ought to be fixed in the first place, and the
-I stuff is debatable. If you are learning how to package stuff,
concentrate on things you _do_ need to fix. Move on to helping fix
lintian once you are comfortable with packaging, and have developed
some judgment about where lintian ought to be heading.
The more control, the more that requires control.
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C