Bernhard R. Link wrote: > But I think it is a problem that such a thing was able to get in. > As it is not a policy rule broken, I fear less that noone has even > looked at the file. But the alternative of someone looking, realising this > mistake and just letting it in anyway is not very conforting either. (speaking only for myself)
While I personally try to take care to only upload pristine .orig.tar.gz for my own packages (and even think that using the delete option might be preferable to unpacking and packing again) I distinctly think that this is out of the scope of NEW checking, so I do not check for it but only inspect the contents of the orig.tar.gz diving into the top directory without paying attention to its name. Rejecting for non-critical packaging issues would not only further increase the reject ratio but also require a lot of additional work. Maybe you should be more concerned that currently more than 1 in 10 packages are rejected from NEW (according to some careless grepping of merkel:/org/ftp.d.o/log/), quite a lot of these involve things that lintian warns about or copyright (which really is only a matter of effort, not skills) even without ftp-master insisting much on the lesser lintian-indicated problems. Kind regards T. -- Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
