Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> Also, if packages have lintian errors/warnings, please provide a link to
> the proper full list of errors and warnings for the maintainer.
Did you read my original email? :)
Let me quote it for you:
> === libflexmock-ruby:
> = Lintian reports 3 warning(s), you should co
On 30/04/09 at 12:07 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Sune Vuorela wrote:
>
> > On 2009-04-30, Lucas Nussbaum 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 e
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:07:55 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> 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 em
Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2009-04-30, Lucas Nussbaum 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
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 01:43:55AM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>
>> 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 g
On 2009-04-30, Lucas Nussbaum 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 someth
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
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 01:43:55AM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> But despite all that my original question hasn't quite been
> answered.
Hasn't it?
> 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
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Raphael Geissert writes:
>> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
>>> Then how about sending a mail if one of the packages has (serious,
>>> certain) lintian errors?
>
>> Lintian currently still uses the EWI code when generating the report
>> which later udd imports. This file lacks the
Raphael Geissert writes:
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> Then how about sending a mail if one of the packages has (serious,
>> certain) lintian errors?
> Lintian currently still uses the EWI code when generating the report
> which later udd imports. This file lacks the severity and certainty
> inform
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> Then how about sending a mail if one of the packages has (serious,
> certain) lintian errors?
Lintian currently still uses the EWI code when generating the report which
later udd imports. This file lacks the severity and certainty information,
which means it would be ne
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:33:07PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > If you think the severity and/or certainty of a given tag is incorrect then
> > please do file a bug report against lintian so that it is discussed if
> > needed and fixed.
> Then how about sending a mail if one of the packages has
On 27/04/09 at 15:23 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> > I really don't think that we should send emails to maintainers if they
> > only have lintian errors (no other problems, like RC bugs). If those
> > lintian errors are so grave, maybe (RC) bugs should be filed?
>
>
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> I really don't think that we should send emails to maintainers if they
> only have lintian errors (no other problems, like RC bugs). If those
> lintian errors are so grave, maybe (RC) bugs should be filed?
Every check has a severity and certainty, so in theory if they th
On 26/04/09 at 12:00 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 00:37:04 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>
> > Would it be ok to leave it that way? or only mention lintian errors? or only
> > when the same package has serious issues? or only when the same package
> > does *not* have any se
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 00:37:04 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Would it be ok to leave it that way? or only mention lintian errors? or only
> when the same package has serious issues? or only when the same package
> does *not* have any serious issue? or any combination of those? or should
> lintian
Hi all,
Most of those reading this email probably already know about it: I'm taking
over ddpo-by-mail. And so I decided to include the number of lintian errors
and warnings on the generated emails, but those not being a reason for the
message to be sent (i.e. it requires that an RC bug exists, the
17 matches
Mail list logo
