Sune Vuorela wrote: > On 2009-04-30, Lucas Nussbaum <lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote: >> On 30/04/09 at 01:43 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: >>> But despite all that my original question hasn't quite been answered. >>> Gregor is in favour of sending messages even if only lintian issues >>> exist, but Lucas doesn't like the idea. >>> What about something in between? only errors if another issue exists for >>> the same given package? or only errors if there's an issue for any of >>> the co-/maintained packages? >> >> I would be fine with any of that. However, the real problem is to keep >> the signal-to-noise ratio high in ddpo mails. If it just becomes yet >> another regular email that can be safely ignored, it will be a net loss >> for QA.
Of course, and that's exactly what am trying to avoid. What about the following combination? * Lintian issues by themselves do not cause the email to be sent * Only lintian errors cause a given package to be mentioned in the email, not warnings. * Errors and warnings counts are both included. Or the following one: * Lintian issues by themselves do not cause the email to be sent * Neither lintian errors nor warnings cause a given package to be mentioned in the email. * Errors and warnings counts are both included. > > And as lintian is already a tool that can be safely ignored, adding its > output to the ddpo-by-mail emails will put them in the same box. Mentioning the number of errors detected by lintian would be too much for you? Since you are one of the few persons reading -qa who isn't keen on lintian you could help us a bit here. What would be fine for you to receive? and what is needed for lintian to be useful to you? Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
