On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 11:32:20 +0200 "Thomas Preud'homme" <robotux@celest.fr> wrote: > Le vendredi 8 juillet 2011 11:13:53, Arno Töll a écrit : > > Hi Karl, > > > > On 08.07.2011 05:49, Karl Goetz wrote: > > >> - The -I and --pedantic options should always be used. > > > > > > Why is that? the manual entry for --pedantic says > > > > [ snip entry] > > > > > > Wouldn't requiring people show tags that aren't relevant just > > > train them to ignore lintian? > > > > its not, pedantic Lintian warnings weren't useful or /only/ false > > positives. There is just a slightly higher degree to encounter false > > positive or "screw you Niel^W^WLintian I don't care at all" tags. > > > > That said, some pedantic tags can probably be ignored but most are > > nonetheless still a very helpful addition one better should consider > > when packaging software. > > I agree. I think the manpage is exagerating on this although I'm not > sure how to rephrase it. The only thing I see would be to change > "Expect false positives" by "Expect a few false positives". But "that > many people disagree with" and "that you don't consider useful" still > push a lot to avoid -- pedantic but I don't know how to rephrase it > without saying something wrong. On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 18:21:16 +0900 Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> wrote: > I would like to add that in my experience, an innocent pedantic tag > that suddenly appears is sometimes the symptom that the package is > totally broken (like for instance lacking almost all files that it > should contain). That is why I always run lintian with --pedantic. Thanks all for expanding on why --pedantic has its place :) thanks, kk -- Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS) Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer http://www.kgoetz.id.au No, I won't join your social networking group
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature