Re: Intend to change lintian.d.o/qa-list.txt
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 07:11:10AM +, Bart Martens wrote: > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 09:09:19PM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: > > As far as I know, Lintian exports a file called "qa-list.txt" > > and I propose we extend it to: > > > >source source-version E W I P X O > > > > In the extended format, it would be something like: > > > > eclipse 3.8.0~rc4-1 0 2 2 0 5 206 > > eclipse 3.8.1-1 0 2 2 0 5 206 > > I suggest that we update PTS and DDPO to be ready to process the extended > format without functional change first, and then extend qa-list.txt. I'm > volunteering to update DDPO for this, and I'll let you know when this is > ready. DDPO is now ready for the extended format. Regards, Bart Martens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121230084510.gf4...@master.debian.org
Re: Intend to change lintian.d.o/qa-list.txt
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 11:40:09AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > I do wonder how the PTS should cope with this change though, any > thoughts? Looks like the two formats are easily mechanically distinguishable: the new one has one extra field. So a viable migration plan with no down time is: (1) patch the PTS code to act differently depending on the number of fields and deploy the change; (2) deploy the change on the lintian infrastructure and rebuild qa-list.txt. Given that not all future format changes would have the luck of being mechanically distinguishable, it might be a good idea to take this chance to add a declared format version, e.g. a first line in qa-list.txt starting with "#", declaring the format name and version. That would make it easy future migrations, if the need arises. I don't think the PTS code currently ignore #-commented lines, so that should be added too. HTH, Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Intend to change lintian.d.o/qa-list.txt
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Looks like the two formats are easily mechanically distinguishable: the That part is easy but I was not thinking about it, but about how the PTS should present the lintian data. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6esdqmfah_8hsvgbjhs0k5k4rzwjti9y6r0ttg+6kj...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Intend to change lintian.d.o/qa-list.txt
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 10:16:06AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 11:40:09AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > I do wonder how the PTS should cope with this change though, any > > thoughts? > > Looks like the two formats are easily mechanically distinguishable: the > new one has one extra field. So a viable migration plan with no down > time is: (1) patch the PTS code to act differently depending on the > number of fields and deploy the change; Yes that's the approach I used for DDPO. > (2) deploy the change on the > lintian infrastructure and rebuild qa-list.txt. > > Given that not all future format changes would have the luck of being > mechanically distinguishable, it might be a good idea to take this > chance to add a declared format version, e.g. a first line in > qa-list.txt starting with "#", declaring the format name and version. > That would make it easy future migrations, if the need arises. Or we could do that later when the need arises. > > I don't think the PTS code currently ignore #-commented lines, so that > should be added too. Same for DDPO. I have now added ignoring #comments for DDPO. Regards, Bart Martens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121230094321.gg4...@master.debian.org
Re: Intend to change lintian.d.o/qa-list.txt
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 05:41:17PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > That part is easy but I was not thinking about it, but about how the > PTS should present the lintian data. Well, in general the PTS presents the information about the most recent version of a package, the idea being that the PTS is a maintainer TODO page and that the maintainer mostly works on the latest version. The same principle could be applied here, unless there are strong reasons to do otherwise. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Intend to change lintian.d.o/qa-list.txt
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 10:57:57AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 05:41:17PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > That part is easy but I was not thinking about it, but about how the > > PTS should present the lintian data. > > Well, in general the PTS presents the information about the most recent > version of a package, the idea being that the PTS is a maintainer TODO > page and that the maintainer mostly works on the latest version. The > same principle could be applied here, unless there are strong reasons to > do otherwise. One could argue that the package in unstable is meant for the next stable release, while in experimental "anything goes", so one could argue that the TODOs on the PTS should (primarily) focus on the package in unstable. I don't object against also displaying information about packages in experimental, but if the package in experimental is newer than the one in unstable, then PTS should still display info about the package in unstable, in my opinion. Regards, Bart Martens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121230104744.gh4...@master.debian.org
Re: Intend to change lintian.d.o/qa-list.txt
On 2012-12-30 09:45, Bart Martens wrote: > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 07:11:10AM +, Bart Martens wrote: >> [...] >> >> I suggest that we update PTS and DDPO to be ready to process the extended >> format without functional change first, and then extend qa-list.txt. I'm >> volunteering to update DDPO for this, and I'll let you know when this is >> ready. > That was my plan! > DDPO is now ready for the extended format. > Thanks! :) > Regards, > > Bart Martens > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50e02162.3030...@thykier.net
Re: Intend to change lintian.d.o/qa-list.txt
On 2012-12-30 10:16, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > [...] > > Given that not all future format changes would have the luck of being > mechanically distinguishable, it might be a good idea to take this > chance to add a declared format version, e.g. a first line in > qa-list.txt starting with "#", declaring the format name and version. > That would make it easy future migrations, if the need arises. > Sounds like a reasonable suggestion. I guess something like d/watch would do: #version= or, if you wanted a format name as well: #format=lintian-summary #version= > I don't think the PTS code currently ignore #-commented lines, so that > should be added too. > > HTH, > Cheers. ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50e0242f.9010...@thykier.net
