[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: xorgproto_2018.4-1_amd64.changes REJECTED



On 03/09/2018 09:38 AM, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 09:55:06AM +0200, Timo Aaltonen wrote:
>> On 09.03.2018 08:00, Chris Lamb wrote:
>>> Version: 2018.4-1
>>> Timestamp: 2018-03-06 19:36:05.059079+00:00
>>> Takes over more then ten packages but gives not the slightest hint that this is correct
>> Hint like what, and for whom, exactly? Upstream merged all the separate
>> protocol packages in one:
> 
> The changelog is a place to document what and sometimes why something
> changed.  In this case it just tells us this package is pristine.  As it
> takes over existing stuff this is obviously not correct, it got some
> kind of a history.
> 
>>> Uses a weird mix of package styles:
>>> W: xorgproto source: patch-system-but-direct-changes-in-diff attic/bigreqsproto/docbook.am
>>> W: xorgproto source: patch-system-but-direct-changes-in-diff attic/bigreqsproto/specs/Makefile.am
>>> W: xorgproto source: patch-system-but-direct-changes-in-diff attic/fontsproto/docbook.am
>>> W: xorgproto source: patch-system-but-direct-changes-in-diff attic/fontsproto/specs/Makefile.am
>> That's because packaging is based on upstream git plus source format 1.0
>> (like ~all xorg-team packages are), and the tarball doesn't ship these.
>> But whatever, I've removed them from the packaging branch.
> 
> Well, lintian thinks this is fishy.  So please do something against such
> warnings (and also the one error!).  In this case I don't see why this
> can't be a 3.0 package, as it even is setup to use a quilt patch series.
> 
Just because lintian thinks this is fishy doesn't mean humans can't
disagree.  This warning applies to hundreds of packages in the archive.
Why this is used as justification for a reject is beyond me.

Cheers,
Julien


Reply to: