Richard Braakman writes: > On Fri, Jan 14, 2000 at 12:05:22PM +0000, Matthew Vernon wrote: > > > FWIW, a package that I uploaded was rejected, with a comment "using > > lintian would have pointed this out"; when I replied that in fact the > > "error" that was being objected to was in fact an intentional > > decision, I didn't even get a reply, and the package languishes > > still in /REJECTED > > This is not a direct consequence of Lintian; when I reject a package > I reject it on its own merits. > > I assume you're talking about adns here. I maintain that the rejection > was valid, because it's a shared-library package that doesn't follow > the shared-library policy at all. (I invite anyone who would join > this discussion to inspect these packages first. They are currently > in /debian/project/Incoming/REJECT/adns*). But this (as I pointed out) is intentional - and there is a thread on policy at the moment about why I think this is the right thing to do. As Ian suggests, such packages should be accepted - if policy decides the decision was wrong, then the maintainer can then change the offending packages. Matthew
-- "At least you know where you are with Microsoft." "True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle." http://www.debian.org
