Stefano Zacchiroli <z...@debian.org> writes: > On a second read of the proposal, it occurred to me (and a handful of > other DDs in private communications agreed) that the above naming choice > of "warning" and "error" can be a bit unfortunate. In fact, lintian > already has its own notion of warning/error and having the naming > overloaded by dak messages that are based on lintian outcome can be > quite confusing.
> Can you please consider changing the above naming? > The first alternative naming that comes to my mind is "non-fatal errors" > vs "fatal errors". It is not particularly exciting as a choice, but I > believe it would be better than warning/error. I think that's a good idea, particularly since I suspect that we'll upgrade anything in Lintian that's an automatic reject to serious severity, which will make most of them errors. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
