Re: strange preinst tests about --assert-working-epoch
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:00:27AM +0100, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 03:58:31PM -0800, Martin Quinson wrote:
> > I completely agree. I didn't meant that all the packages with epoch should
> > check for it. I more wanted to get rid of the cruft in the packages doing
> > the test. Why ? Well, for no real reason, in fact.
>
> Well, only a thought, but the use of such a test in the preinst, could
> mean the maintainer is not revisioning his/her package, so a sort of
> 'informative' mail may be sent.
Some maintainers may well feel that there's no reason to remove a
perfectly working test. All it means is that the package has been around
for a long time.
There are better ways to tell if a package is unmaintained (like, er,
the last maintainer upload in the changelog and the number of bugs ...).
> I'm quite new to the list, but shouldn't the qa group handle even
> these task? With the least possible priority, though.
I agree with the last sentence more than anything else I've read in this
thread so far. :)
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: