On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 05:44:42 -0500, Chris Lamb wrote: > > > Oh dear, we appear to have generated a lot of philosophical > > > conversation here for what was almost-certainly just a slight typo > > > or misstep on the behalf of the aforementioned bug submitter. > > > > See my other reply. This was certainly neither a typo nor a misstep, > > it was fully intentional. > > For some reason I didn't see this. Reverted in: > > > https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/commit/dcfeeb7c460be82c9ad1b3d99bf44e06746e649c
Thanks! > > :(, but if you are going to change that at least make it consistent > > with all other dictionaries and probably the sounds too. IMO having > > this overall inconsistent section placement is worse than having the > > specific hunspell packages in the wrong section. > > Could you propose a patch that would fix this to your satisfaction? > I'm having a little difficulty sorting this out in my head now > after applying, reverting, etc. etc. :) If you ask me personally, I think lintian is fine as it is! I'd probably just update the section descriptions to clarify this, and prepare a mass override request for ftp-masters. But I'd like to hear from the reporters and others who complained about the secion change to know whether they have been convinced by the arguments? :) At the same time, being this now the nth time I've gone over all section names/descriptions, I'm strongly considering trying to push forward a way to make dak expose them or package them so that we only need to modify in one or two places instead of many. Thanks, Guillem
