I think that before providing a long description I'd like to see where
the policy process gets. As DPL I think it's fine for me to put issues
onto people's radars based on project-level discussions as part of my
facilitator role. I'm less comfortable proposing things like a long
description in that role. Obviously I could do that as an individual
developer, but I'd rather see where the community gets.
I plan to block this bug with the policy bug at least until they get
further along.
>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Lamb <la...@debian.org> writes:
>> It would be even better to detect some of the adequate
>> justifications automatically like Haskell packages.
Chris> Unless I'm misunderstanding this request, we have no
Chris> functionality to "meta warn" when a tag is overridden without
Chris> an "adequate" or even a non-verbose justification. This would
Chris> seem overly error-prone.
I'm sorry, let me try to be more clear. It would be nice if a
maintainer of a Haskell package did not need to override the tag. That
is, in cases where we can adequately detect that the package is in one
of the exceptional cases, it would be nice if lintian didn't issue a
warning.
I understand lintian cannot judge whether a maintainer's
reasoning is adequate. When lintian does gain that strong AI
functionality, I'm sure you can ask it to update this and a number of
other tags based on its best judgment. I'm sorry that I was unclear to
the point of asking for the impossible.
