On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:08:53 -0600 Raphael Geissert <atomo64+deb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The package appears to be lintian clean. > > Not really: > $ lintian --pedantic -IE --show-overrides sl-modem*dsc > W: sl-modem source: debhelper-but-no-misc-depends sl-modem-source That one is fine, but I'm concerned with your use of --pedantic. > I: sl-modem source: quilt-patch-missing-description modem_group.diff Is that the result of --pedantic or just normal lintian? Raphael - are you saying that full compliance with the very new --pedantic option to lintian is now part of your sponsoring requirements? I'm not looking at this package in particular, but IMHO --pedantic needs quite a lot of care in handling - Russ admits that pedantic has less certainty than ordinary lintian checks with more room for false positives and false negatives. http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/journal/2009-01/019.html "People should only use --pendantic if they're willing to see tags that are inaccurate or don't fit their personal style and take them with a grain of salt." It might be worth qualifying your use of --pedantic as your own preference. Do you filter some of the messages from --pedantic? I know you wanted --pedantic and worked on the implementation, but --pedantic does have problems and the results of using --pedantic are, IMHO, highly unreliable and in need of filtering one a package-by-package basis. FTR, I won't be using --pedantic *unless* it reveals a particular issue that I would like to have fixed anyway, i.e. where lintian provides some help on how to fix the issue. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
pgpIyIJjTBQLC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
