On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 12:49:34PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> So, I grabbed fmirror today because an admin friend suggested it. I cd'ed to
> /usr/share/doc/fmirror and low and behold, no /usr/share/doc/fmirror. I check
> the changelog and this binary-any package has not been uploaded in 2 years. It
> is standards version 2.3.0.1, ICK!
>
> So, perhaps we should drop the bar a little. If your package is not at least
> 3.x.x, it gets held.
I object to this. Holding packages due to actual bugs, yes
certainly. Holding packages because there's a number that seems to
indicate there might possibly be bugs, no way in hell.
I'd encourage the lintian maintainer ( :) ) to automatically file "old
standards version" bugs about such packages (of normal/minor/wishlist
severity); and I'd definitely encourage the lintian maintainer to file
serious bugs about automatically detect-able violations of any MUST
directives in current policy (no matter what standards-version the
packages claims to comply with).
But please don't file RC bugs unless there is a *specific* problem with
the package.
Shaleh, I'm not sure I got around to filing a bug against lintian about this,
but it'd be nice if lintian differentiated between MUST/SHOULD/MAY violations
in its output. Something like:
E!: non-FHS-directory
E-: missing-manpage
E?: standards-version-uses-4-digits-not-3
or similar, perhaps?
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Attachment:
pgpWLop_fhmSs.pgp
Description: PGP signature