Bug#1109680: release.debian.org: use lintian results to block testing migration
On 12/08/25 at 23:05 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 05:39:14PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> >...
> > > I saw the discussion about the number of tag occurences for a given
> > > source package, that should be used to identify regressions. Tags are
> > > currently only listed once per source. It would be possible to add the
> > > number of occurences for each tag (with distinct "information"). Let me
> > > know.
> >
> > Currently I'm only thinking of aliased-location, which we really want to
> > prevent altogether, but in the future we might want to add things that
> > shouldn't regress. But maybe we can delay that to when we get there unless
> > you already have a good idea for that?
>
> I don't think a regression approach makes sense for lintian tags,
> especially not for warnings.
>
> When a package has a new binary that does not have a manpage,
> there is a new lintian warning.
>
> A missing manpage is a problem in a package that should be visible,
> but I don't see how this could warrant blocking testing migration.
>
> If you block testing migration on that, you are forcing the maintainer
> to hide the problem by adding a lintian override.
I understand that the plan is to block on a small subset of tags (which
probably wouldn't include missing manpages).
Lucas
Reply to: