Raphael Geissert <[email protected]> writes: > Russ Allbery wrote: >> Raphael Geissert writes:
>>> None of these require my previous changes to be applied, but would be >>> great if the others could be applied as well. >> I applied the first patch. For the move of common_data, I agree that >> this is an improvement over the current state, but except for >> %known_arches, that data actually belongs in Lintian::Data. > I though about doing that too, but I hesitated. Attached mbox does it all. I applied this patch because it's an improvement over what we had previously, but I think you misread my message. What I'm saying is that *all* of that data that you moved from one place to another should be in Lintian::Data. I want to get away from having these big static hashes in the check scripts where we can and move that data into Lintian::Data, where it's easier to edit and understand. The same is true of all the simple lists that's currently in the check/* scripts and didn't move. (The regexes and the more complex data structures, such as the interpreters in checks/scripts, probably need to stay Perl.) But we don't have to do all of that right now and I definitely agree that this is an improvement. It also brings us fairly close to eliminating common_data.pm, which I've wanted to do for a while. Then we won't need those extra use libs that are easy to forget and will be closer to having a real module structure. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
