Re: Some thoughts about fields in UDD
Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 04:32:15PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Well, I think it's just capturing everything in the Sources list.
>> Having that consistency where everything is captured does seem like a
>> nice feature to me.
> Lucas answered in the same line and while I'm not really convinced and
> would prefer to see this rather in a view I have to agree that the
> strategy was successfull in detecting some useless fields in packages.
> However, if nobody does a checks I did by chance this would have been
> undetected and if instead the importer would detect such things and
> refuse to move this to the database it might trigger immediate action.
Well, Lintian does warn about useless Origin and Bugs fields, so there are
other paths to do that.
>> I suspect many of them are buggy. I'm surprised there's no Lintian
>> warning for the presence of a Bugs field.
> Should we file a bug report against lintian? I might do this but I
> would like to make sure I've understand things right. (I even was not
> aware that there is such a Bugs field ...)
I remembered why we don't have one: Lintian is supposed to be able to
check private packages as well, which probably should have this sort of
field. Lintian doesn't really have a "specific for Debian" flag at the
moment. We should probably add something like that -- maybe that's the
bug report against Lintian that really should be filed. There are various
other things that we could move into that category that would make
maintaining one version of Lintian for both Debian and Ubuntu easier, such
as checking for symlinked copyright files (allowed in Ubuntu but not in
Debian).
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: