Re: guix lint should support overrides

[Maxime Devos]

On 24-08-2022 10:08, zimoun wrote:

Hi Vagrant,

On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 at 15:22, Vagrant Cascadian<vagr...@debian.org>  wrote:

But, because there is no way to silence a particular inappropriate
suggestion from guix lint, it becomes noise, and each person evaluating
the results of the package in the future then needs to take time to
figure out if guix lint is wrong, or something should be changed.

Do you have some packages as example?  In order to be concrete about the
false-positive and how to programatically fix them.

For instance, do you mean exclude on specific checker for one specific
package?  Or teach one specific checker for one specific package in
order to avoid an error specific to this package running this specific
checker?

Myself (not Vagrant) I was thinking of the gnu-description linter.



Unfortunately I cannot find the relevant e-mails anymore.





Greetings,
Maxime.

IIRC, there was some package where I proposed to modify the description a little to be more informative and fit better in Guix, but then the gnu-description proposed to use the upstream description. Consequently, it was decided to use the original, IMO worse, description. This was a true positive, not a false positive, but I think it would have been useful to silence the linter there anyway. At least for these kind of cases, I would go for a package property (properties '((silence-linters gnu-description))).

OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature