Russ Allbery wrote: [...] > > I applied this patch because it's an improvement over what we had > previously, but I think you misread my message.
Indeed :-/ > 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.) I can't think of any of the regexes fitting better in data/ than in the check script itself, but in case there is one Lintian::Data should be regex-aware in the sense that it should use qr as possible as to minimise the performance penalty. > > 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. > Sure. Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
