[lintian] 01/01: spelling: Add several corrections

[Paul Wise]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

pabs pushed a commit to branch master
in repository lintian.

commit 7b8251a6fc6e0eb8e8cc9d4825356336962b3513
Author: Paul Wise 
Date:   Wed Jan 3 16:39:34 2018 +0800

spelling: Add several corrections
---
 data/spelling/corrections | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/data/spelling/corrections b/data/spelling/corrections
index f813e57..2598a91 100644
--- a/data/spelling/corrections
+++ b/data/spelling/corrections
@@ -41,6 +41,8 @@ absorbtion||absorption
 absoulte||absolute
 abstact||abstract
 abstactly||abstractly
+accapt||accept
+accapted||accepted
 acccept||accept
 acccepted||accepted
 acccepting||accepting

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

[lintian] branch master updated (4d52dec -> 7b8251a)

[Paul Wise]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

pabs pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.

  from  4d52dec   reporting/templates/maintainer.tmpl: Make the 
previously-hidden package anchor links visible so that one can right-click and 
copy the URL instead of constructing it manually.
   new  7b8251a   spelling: Add several corrections

The 1 revisions listed above as "new" are entirely new to this
repository and will be described in separate emails.  The revisions
listed as "adds" were already present in the repository and have only
been added to this reference.


Summary of changes:
 data/spelling/corrections | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Holger Levsen]

package: lintian
severity: wishlist
x-debbugs-cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org

On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 05:26:35PM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
> I think that Lintian shouldn't warn about not using the latest
> Standards-Version; perhaps it should warn when you're using a really old
> one.

Same here. IMO warnings about the last two policy versions should only be
shown in pedantic mode. If a package is 3 versions behind, then this
should be a normal lintian warning.


-- 
cheers,
Holger


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Processed (with 1 error): Re: Bug#886219: Acknowledgement (lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> merge 886219 886210
Bug #886219 [lintian] lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy 
version
Unable to merge bugs because:
severity of #886210 is 'normal' not 'wishlist'
Failed to merge 886219: Did not alter merged bugs.

> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
886210: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886210
886219: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886219
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: Re: Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> found -1 2.5.67
Bug #886219 [lintian] lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy 
version
Marked as found in versions lintian/2.5.67.

-- 
886219: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886219
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Mattia Rizzolo]

Control: found -1 2.5.67

On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 08:54:48AM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 05:26:35PM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > I think that Lintian shouldn't warn about not using the latest
> > Standards-Version; perhaps it should warn when you're using a really old
> > one.
> 
> Same here. IMO warnings about the last two policy versions should only be
> shown in pedantic mode. If a package is 3 versions behind, then this
> should be a normal lintian warning.

Currently there are two related tags:
* https://lintian.debian.org/tags/out-of-date-standards-version.html
  which is reported when an upload is done and the date of the
  changelog is older than the date of a policy release newer than what
  is in Std-Ver. (I.e. a package doesn't get this if no uploads are
  done, but it assumes that when somebody updates a package the
  maintainer checks whether it is compliant to the very last Policy
  update, which IMHO it is totally reasonable…?)
* https://lintian.debian.org/tags/ancient-standards-version.html
  which is reported if the mentioned Std-Ver has been superseded for
  more than two years (i.e. this is the tag a package gains for not
  being updated in that much time and a new Policy release happened in
  the meantime).


They are both warnings, and IMHO they are both totally valid as
warnings.
If you update your package you should spend your time checking it is
still Policy compliant (how would you know it is otherwise without
checking?!), and bumping this tiny field is just a marker you did so.


What do you propose to change?  Consider that before this August (i.e.,
when the Policy editor teams got revamped) Policy releases were fairly
rare, and for sure you wouldn't want to wait 2 releases (average of ~3
years, by looking at it) before warning… And honestly I hope it gets
back to fewer and smaller releases soon again, as it is honestly hard
for me as well to keep up with the changes (I could remember 3.9.{6,7,8}
changes by heart, I can't with the latest…).  But it doesn't mean that I
as a maintainer should make an effort to keep up and check for Policy
compliance at each package update.

-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540  .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Ben Finney]

Holger Levsen  writes:

> package: lintian
> severity: wishlist
> x-debbugs-cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org
>
> On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 05:26:35PM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > I think that Lintian shouldn't warn about not using the latest
> > Standards-Version; perhaps it should warn when you're using a really old
> > one.
>
> Same here. IMO warnings about the last two policy versions should only be
> shown in pedantic mode. If a package is 3 versions behind, then this
> should be a normal lintian warning.

The version strings used for Policy offer a hierarchy of the magnitude
of changes. Perhaps Lintian should use that hierarchy to determine the
severity of the tag.

An example rule set could be:

* Standards-Version matches Policy version at all levels (e.g. Policy is
  “4.4.4.4”, package declares “4.4.4.4”), results in no tag.

* Standards-Version matches Policy version only to the patch level (e.g.
  Policy version “4.4.4.4”, package declares “4.4.4.1”) is Severity:
  pedantic.

* Standards-Version matches Policy version only to the minor level (e.g.
  Policy version “4.4.4.4”, package declares “4.4.3.7”), is Severity:
  minor.

* Standards-Version matches Policy version only to the major level (e.g.
  Policy version “4.4.4.4”, package declares “4.3.8.9”), is Severity:
  major.

* Standards-Version is earlier than Policy version major level (e.g.
  Policy version “4.4.4.4”, package declares “3.5.2.6”), is Severity:
  serious.

That would allow the Policy maintainers to communicate the magnitude of
changes via the version string, and Lintian just obeys those magnitudes
via a simple SemVer match between the version strings.

-- 
 \  “Religions die when they are proved to be true. Science is the |
  `\ record of dead religions.” —Oscar Wilde, _Phrases and |
_o__) Philosophies for the Use of the Young_, 1894 |
Ben Finney 

Processed: Re: Downgrade "old-standards-version" to an info

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> retitle 886210 Downgrade "newer-standards-version" to an info
Bug #886210 [lintian] Downgrade "old-standards-version" to an info
Changed Bug title to 'Downgrade "newer-standards-version" to an info' from 
'Downgrade "old-standards-version" to an info'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
886210: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886210
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

[lintian] 01/01: checks/standards-version.desc: Downgrade severity of newer-standards-version from normal ("W:") to wishlist ("I:"). (Closes: #886210)

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a commit to branch master
in repository lintian.

commit 97912d84cf49d35188ac91ed3a50357095400386
Author: Chris Lamb 
Date:   Wed Jan 3 13:45:15 2018 +

checks/standards-version.desc: Downgrade severity of 
newer-standards-version from normal ("W:") to wishlist ("I:"). (Closes: #886210)
---
 checks/standards-version.desc| 2 +-
 debian/changelog | 3 +++
 t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags | 2 +-
 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/checks/standards-version.desc b/checks/standards-version.desc
index b4ef6c3..d60f1b4 100644
--- a/checks/standards-version.desc
+++ b/checks/standards-version.desc
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Info: The source package refers to a Standards-Version which 
never
  control field appropriately.
 
 Tag: newer-standards-version
-Severity: normal
+Severity: wishlist
 Certainty: certain
 Info: The source package refers to a Standards-Version which is
  newer than the highest one Lintian is programmed to check.  If the source
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index bebf62a..4abe65a 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -24,6 +24,9 @@ lintian (2.5.68) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
 + [CL] Skip Objective-C libraries for the no-symbols-control-file tag
   as instance/class methods do not appear in the symbol table. Thanks
   to Yavor Doganov for the report and help.  (Closes: #749202)
+  * checks/standards-version.desc:
++ [CL] Downgrade severity of newer-standards-version from normal ("W:")
+  to wishlist ("I:").  (Closes: #886210)
 
   * data/files/fnames:
 + [CL] Warn about packages that ship (non-reproducible) Python
diff --git a/t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags 
b/t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags
index 0bdef9f..584080e 100644
--- a/t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags
+++ b/t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags
@@ -1 +1 @@
-W: standards-version-newer source: newer-standards-version 5.15.0.0 (current 
is CURRENT)
+I: standards-version-newer source: newer-standards-version 5.15.0.0 (current 
is CURRENT)

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

[lintian] branch master updated (7b8251a -> 97912d8)

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.

  from  7b8251a   spelling: Add several corrections
   new  97912d8   checks/standards-version.desc: Downgrade severity of 
newer-standards-version from normal ("W:") to wishlist ("I:"). (Closes: #886210)

The 1 revisions listed above as "new" are entirely new to this
repository and will be described in separate emails.  The revisions
listed as "adds" were already present in the repository and have only
been added to this reference.


Summary of changes:
 checks/standards-version.desc| 2 +-
 debian/changelog | 3 +++
 t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags | 2 +-
 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

Processed: Re: Downgrade "old-standards-version" to an info

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> retitle 886210 Downgrade "out-of-date-standards-version" to an info
Bug #886210 [lintian] Downgrade "newer-standards-version" to an info
Changed Bug title to 'Downgrade "out-of-date-standards-version" to an info' 
from 'Downgrade "newer-standards-version" to an info'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
886210: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886210
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

[lintian] 01/01: checks/standards-version.desc: Correct which tag are altering.

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a commit to branch master
in repository lintian.

commit 098ceec8af75aae4d228c634fc1b19224b0e9273
Author: Chris Lamb 
Date:   Wed Jan 3 13:52:07 2018 +

checks/standards-version.desc: Correct which tag are altering.
---
 checks/standards-version.desc| 4 ++--
 debian/changelog | 4 ++--
 t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags | 2 +-
 t/tests/standards-version-old/tags   | 2 +-
 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/checks/standards-version.desc b/checks/standards-version.desc
index d60f1b4..7a7adc4 100644
--- a/checks/standards-version.desc
+++ b/checks/standards-version.desc
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Info: The source package refers to a Standards-Version which 
never
  control field appropriately.
 
 Tag: newer-standards-version
-Severity: wishlist
+Severity: normal
 Certainty: certain
 Info: The source package refers to a Standards-Version which is
  newer than the highest one Lintian is programmed to check.  If the source
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ Info: The source package refers to a Standards-Version that 
has been
  Policy.
 
 Tag: out-of-date-standards-version
-Severity: normal
+Severity: wishlist
 Certainty: certain
 Ref: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/upgrading-checklist.txt
 Info: The source package refers to a Standards-Version older than the one
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index 4abe65a..11fcc48 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -25,8 +25,8 @@ lintian (2.5.68) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
   as instance/class methods do not appear in the symbol table. Thanks
   to Yavor Doganov for the report and help.  (Closes: #749202)
   * checks/standards-version.desc:
-+ [CL] Downgrade severity of newer-standards-version from normal ("W:")
-  to wishlist ("I:").  (Closes: #886210)
++ [CL] Downgrade severity of out-of-date-standards-version from normal
+  ("W:") to wishlist ("I:").  (Closes: #886210)
 
   * data/files/fnames:
 + [CL] Warn about packages that ship (non-reproducible) Python
diff --git a/t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags 
b/t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags
index 584080e..0bdef9f 100644
--- a/t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags
+++ b/t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags
@@ -1 +1 @@
-I: standards-version-newer source: newer-standards-version 5.15.0.0 (current 
is CURRENT)
+W: standards-version-newer source: newer-standards-version 5.15.0.0 (current 
is CURRENT)
diff --git a/t/tests/standards-version-old/tags 
b/t/tests/standards-version-old/tags
index d9e8668..1973c9a 100644
--- a/t/tests/standards-version-old/tags
+++ b/t/tests/standards-version-old/tags
@@ -1 +1 @@
-W: standards-version-old source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.9.6 (current 
is CURRENT)
+I: standards-version-old source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.9.6 (current 
is CURRENT)

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

[lintian] branch master updated (97912d8 -> 098ceec)

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.

  from  97912d8   checks/standards-version.desc: Downgrade severity of 
newer-standards-version from normal ("W:") to wishlist ("I:"). (Closes: #886210)
   new  098ceec   checks/standards-version.desc: Correct which tag are 
altering.

The 1 revisions listed above as "new" are entirely new to this
repository and will be described in separate emails.  The revisions
listed as "adds" were already present in the repository and have only
been added to this reference.


Summary of changes:
 checks/standards-version.desc| 4 ++--
 debian/changelog | 4 ++--
 t/tests/standards-version-newer/tags | 2 +-
 t/tests/standards-version-old/tags   | 2 +-
 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

Bug#886210: Downgrade "newer-standards-version" to an info

[Chris Lamb]

tags 886210 + pending
thanks

Fixed in:

  
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=97912d84cf49d35188ac91ed3a50357095400386
  
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=098ceec8af75aae4d228c634fc1b19224b0e9273


Regards,

-- 
  ,''`.
 : :'  : Chris Lamb
 `. `'`  la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
   `-

Processed: Re: Downgrade "newer-standards-version" to an info

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> tags 886210 + pending
Bug #886210 [lintian] Downgrade "out-of-date-standards-version" to an info
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
886210: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886210
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Sean Whitton]

control: severity -1 normal

Hello,

Thank you for filing this bug, Holger.

Mattia and I are in significant disagreement over this and both feel
quite strongly about the topic (hence the severity bump -- I think this
moderately important for Debian).  In this e-mail I want to lay out in
full detail why I would like to see this change in Lintian.

On Wed, Jan 03 2018, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:

> Currently there are two related tags:
> * https://lintian.debian.org/tags/out-of-date-standards-version.html
>   which is reported when an upload is done and the date of the
>   changelog is older than the date of a policy release newer than what
>   is in Std-Ver. (I.e. a package doesn't get this if no uploads are
>   done, but it assumes that when somebody updates a package the
>   maintainer checks whether it is compliant to the very last Policy
>   update, which IMHO it is totally reasonable…?)
> * https://lintian.debian.org/tags/ancient-standards-version.html
>   which is reported if the mentioned Std-Ver has been superseded for
>   more than two years (i.e. this is the tag a package gains for not
>   being updated in that much time and a new Policy release happened in
>   the meantime).

Thanks for summarising exactly when these tags are triggered, Mattia.

Let me first say exactly what change I'd recommend:

- out-of-date-standards-version should be I: or P: instead of W:
- ancient-standards-version should remain W:
- ancient-standards-version should be triggered when S-V contains a
  release of Policy from the previous stable release cycle

The third point is mostly covered already because our stable release
cycles are roughly two years, but possibly there is a better mechanism.

> They are both warnings, and IMHO they are both totally valid as
> warnings.  If you update your package you should spend your time
> checking it is still Policy compliant (how would you know it is
> otherwise without checking?!), and bumping this tiny field is just a
> marker you did so.
>
> What do you propose to change?  Consider that before this August
> (i.e., when the Policy editor teams got revamped) Policy releases were
> fairly rare, and for sure you wouldn't want to wait 2 releases
> (average of ~3 years, by looking at it) before warning… And honestly I
> hope it gets back to fewer and smaller releases soon again, as it is
> honestly hard for me as well to keep up with the changes (I could
> remember 3.9.{6,7,8} changes by heart, I can't with the latest…).  But
> it doesn't mean that I as a maintainer should make an effort to keep
> up and check for Policy compliance at each package update.

You argue that
- whenever a maintainer uploads a package and S-V is out-of-date, they
  should work through the relevant entries in the Policy Manual's
  Upgrading Checklist
- Policy Manual releases should be infrequent to avoid maintainers
  having to do this too often

On the contrary, I argue that
- the only thing that should be /required/ when uploading a package is
  making the package non-trivially better than the current version in
  unstable
- updating S-V should never block uploading other improvements
- there are good reasons to release the Policy Manual frequently, and
  this should not be blocked by the expectation that everyone respond to
  those new versions in their very next uploads.

From the project's point of view, every maintainer is a volunteer.  We
take pains to never /require/ anyone to work on anything; it's even in
our constitution.  However, if certain work that someone wants to do has
prerequisite work, we require volunteers to do that prerequisite work
before doing the work they want to do.

For example, if someone wants to prepare a patch to fix a bug in the
current stable release, we require them to write up a justification as
to why the fix should go into stable, in a bug report against
release.d.o.  Writing that justification is the prerequisite to the work
they really want to do, which is upload the patched package to
stable-p-u.  (I don't mean to suggest that everyone hates writing up
those justifications; I'm just using this as an example of prerequisite
work we require of volunteers.)

There is a tension here.  As prerequisite work becomes more onerous, it
becomes less clear that we are not requiring people to work on
something.  "You don't have to do this work, but then you can't do that
thing you really want/need to do." -- depending on the circumstances,
this might be basically to force someone to do work.

A general principle emerges: we don't require prerequisite work except
where that prerequisite work is needed to co-ordinate with other
volunteers.  For example, if you have a patch for stable but you don't
write up a justification, an SRM must expend a great deal more effort to
determine whether that fix should go into stable -- a great deal more
effort than it would have taken you to write the justification.  It's
not fair to externalise work on other volunteers, so we require the
prerequisite

Processed: Re: Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> severity -1 normal
Bug #886219 [lintian] lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy 
version
Severity set to 'normal' from 'wishlist'

-- 
886219: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886219
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#886259: please downgrade dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life to info or pedantic

[Holger Levsen]

package: lintian
severity: wishlist
x-debbugs-cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org, d...@list.debian.org

On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 02:24:46PM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
[...lots of stuff I agree with deleted...]
> Lintian errors and warnings tell you, roughly, "watch out, your upload
> might/will make the state of this package in unstable worse than it is
> as present."  By contrast, info and pedantic tags say, roughly, "here is
> another improvement you could make to this package."  Working through
> the ugprading checklist almost always falls into the latter category.

Ok, you convinced me to file this very bug now.

Context:

On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 01:38:48PM +, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Holger,
> 
> > I think I would prefer to
> > dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life
> > to become a pedantic warning
> 
> FYI I initially introduced this tag (and
> python-foo-but-no-python3-foo)
> as a pedantic level warning following roughly the same rationale as
> you
> outline.
> 
> However, it was raised later via https://bugs.debian.org/883581.

As Sean explains nicely in <87vagjt3yp@zephyr.silentflame.com> I
think dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life should be info
or pedanic at least until Buster is released.


-- 
cheers,
Holger


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#886258: Clarify whether or not the Standards-Version field must be present, or lower Lintian tag severity

[Sean Whitton]

Package: debian-policy, lintian
Severity: normal

Hello,

On Tue, Jan 02 2018, Markus Koschany wrote:

> If the Standards-Version field is optional, great! Then let's get rid of
> it right now. The Lintian error is presumably as mistake, isn't it?

Either Policy should mandate this field, or it should not be a Lintian
error when it is not present.

-- 
Sean Whitton


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Mattia Rizzolo]

Control: forecemerge -1 886210
Control: tag -1 pending

the previous merge from Holger failed due to mismatching severities.

On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 02:24:46PM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Mattia and I are in significant disagreement over this and both feel
> quite strongly about the topic (hence the severity bump -- I think this
> moderately important for Debian).  In this e-mail I want to lay out in
> full detail why I would like to see this change in Lintian.

Whilst that might be true, I don't think it's actually worth discussing,
we can get along pretty fine anyway :)
But let me answer some of your points.

> Let me first say exactly what change I'd recommend:
> 
> - out-of-date-standards-version should be I: or P: instead of W:

This happened:
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=97912d84cf49d35188ac91ed3a50357095400386
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=098ceec8af75aae4d228c634fc1b19224b0e9273
It will be in the next Lintian release.

So please let's not lose our heads in discussing this to death.

> > remember 3.9.{6,7,8} changes by heart, I can't with the latest…).  But
> > it doesn't mean that I as a maintainer should make an effort to keep
here I forgot a negation  ↑
It should read "it doesn't mean that I shouldn't make an effort".

> > up and check for Policy compliance at each package update.
> 
> You argue that
> - whenever a maintainer uploads a package and S-V is out-of-date, they
>   should work through the relevant entries in the Policy Manual's
>   Upgrading Checklist

Yes.

> - Policy Manual releases should be infrequent to avoid maintainers
>   having to do this too often

That would be nice, but I'm don't have a strong opinion on it.

> On the contrary, I argue that
> - the only thing that should be /required/ when uploading a package is
>   making the package non-trivially better than the current version in
>   unstable
> - updating S-V should never block uploading other improvements

I agree with all of this.  I say that a maintainer *should* do that
work.  If he doesn't because he believe his other changes are more
important and he wants to upload nonetheless, by all means, please do!
But then, be prepared for people and tools who look at your package to
notice that nobody checked whether it complies with the latest Policy.
That's all about it.  You haven't done something that you should do,
that's reflected.
For example, I often deferred bumping std-ver on packages which lagged a
lot behind and it would have take me too much time to through several
screenful of upgrading checklist, because I believed delivering other
fixes were more important at that time.

I personally am not too attached to lintian severities.  I keep all
pedantic and wishlist tags on, and always go through all of them
whenever I upload anything.

> - there are good reasons to release the Policy Manual frequently, and
>   this should not be blocked by the expectation that everyone respond to
>   those new versions in their very next uploads.

Sure.

> ISTM that requiring maintainers to check packages against the upgrading
> checklist before they can upload other improvements is an example of
> requiring prerequisite work of volunteers that is not needed for
> co-ordinating with other volunteers.  So we should not require it.

Agree, we should not require it.  But I believe we should definitely
(more or less strongly) recommend it.

-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540  .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Processed (with 1 error): Re: Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> forecemerge -1 886210
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.

> tag -1 pending
Bug #886219 [lintian] lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy 
version
Added tag(s) pending.

-- 
886219: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886219
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[David Bremner]

Sean Whitton  writes:

> Let me first say exactly what change I'd recommend:
>
> - out-of-date-standards-version should be I: or P: instead of W:
> - ancient-standards-version should remain W:
> - ancient-standards-version should be triggered when S-V contains a
>   release of Policy from the previous stable release cycle
>
> The third point is mostly covered already because our stable release
> cycles are roughly two years, but possibly there is a better mechanism.

This sounds good to me.

> On the contrary, I argue that
> - the only thing that should be /required/ when uploading a package is
>   making the package non-trivially better than the current version in
>   unstable
> - updating S-V should never block uploading other improvements
> - there are good reasons to release the Policy Manual frequently, and
>   this should not be blocked by the expectation that everyone respond to
>   those new versions in their very next uploads.

Agreed.

People who have time and motivation to polish their packages to
perfection are probably already using --pedantic.

As Princess Leia would say, the more lintian tightens its grip, the
more maintainers will slip through its fingers.

d

Processed: forcibly merging 886219 886210

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> forcemerge 886219 886210
Bug #886219 [lintian] lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy 
version
Bug #886219 [lintian] lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy 
version
Marked as found in versions lintian/2.5.66.
Bug #886210 [lintian] Downgrade "out-of-date-standards-version" to an info
Marked as found in versions lintian/2.5.67.
Merged 886210 886219
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
886210: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886210
886219: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886219
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

[lintian] 01/01: checks/python.desc: Lower the severity of the "dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life" tag from normal ("E:") to wishlist ("W:") as it is not necessarily actionable by th

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a commit to branch master
in repository lintian.

commit 06e998db45cbd874740d12a9e553d74a576703a3
Author: Chris Lamb 
Date:   Wed Jan 3 15:22:38 2018 +

checks/python.desc: Lower the severity of the 
"dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life" tag from normal ("E:") to 
wishlist ("W:") as it is not necessarily actionable by the maintainer. This 
reverts bug #883581. (Closes: #886259)
---
 checks/python.desc|  8 
 debian/changelog  |  6 +-
 t/tests/python-python2-apps/tags  | 12 ++--
 t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc |  2 ++
 t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/tags |  4 ++--
 t/tests/scripts-interpreters/tags |  2 +-
 t/tests/scripts-missing-dep-fp/tags   |  2 +-
 7 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/checks/python.desc b/checks/python.desc
index 5144fb0..bde9f5a 100644
--- a/checks/python.desc
+++ b/checks/python.desc
@@ -61,16 +61,16 @@ Info: This package alternatively Build-Depends on the 
Python 2 or Python 3
  python3-sphinx.
 
 Tag: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life
-Severity: normal
+Severity: wishlist
 Certainty: certain
 Ref: https://wiki.debian.org/Python/Python3Port, 
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0373/
 Info: The package specifies a dependency on Python 2.x which is due for
  deprecation and will not be maintained past 2020.
  .
- Please port the package to use Python 3 instead.
+ Please port the package to use Python 3 instead or ask upstream to do so.
  .
- If upstream have not moved or have no intention to move to Python 3, please be
- certain that Debian would benefit from the inclusion of this package.
+ If upstream have not moved (or have no intention to move) to Python 3, please
+ be certain that Debian benefits from the inclusion of this package.
 
 Tag: django-package-does-not-depend-on-django
 Severity: normal
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index 11fcc48..6fb354d 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -14,9 +14,13 @@ lintian (2.5.68) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
   * checks/fields.pm:
 + [CL] Warn about orphaned packages that are not maintained in the
   Debian infrastucture.  (Closes: #886057)
-  * checks/python.pm:
+  * checks/python.{pm,desc}:
 + [CL] Don't warn about django-package-does-not-depend-on-django for
   -doc packages, etc.
++ [CL] Lower the severity of the
+  "dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life" tag from normal
+  ("W:") to wishlist ("I:") as it is not necessarily actionable by the
+  maintainer. This reverts bug #883581.  (Closes: #886259)
   * checks/rules.pm:
 + [CL] Also allow $(overridden_command) when checking for the
   override_dh_fixperms-does-not-call-dh_fixperms etc. tags.
diff --git a/t/tests/python-python2-apps/tags b/t/tests/python-python2-apps/tags
index a569b7e..190d50a 100644
--- a/t/tests/python-python2-apps/tags
+++ b/t/tests/python-python2-apps/tags
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-W: pkg-depends-any: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Depends: python)
-W: pkg-depends: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life (Depends: 
python)
-W: pkg-pre-depends: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Pre-Depends: python2.7)
-W: pkg-recommends: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Recommends: python-dev)
-W: pkg-suggests: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Suggests: python)
-W: pkg-suggests: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Suggests: python2.7)
+I: pkg-depends-any: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Depends: python)
+I: pkg-depends: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life (Depends: 
python)
+I: pkg-pre-depends: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Pre-Depends: python2.7)
+I: pkg-recommends: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Recommends: python-dev)
+I: pkg-suggests: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Suggests: python)
+I: pkg-suggests: dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life 
(Suggests: python2.7)
diff --git a/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc 
b/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc
index d8a3334..41f98c0 100644
--- a/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc
+++ b/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc
@@ -10,4 +10,6 @@ Test-For: control-interpreter-in-usr-local
  preinst-interpreter-without-predepends
  control-interpreter-without-depends
  unknown-control-interpreter
+Test-Against:
+ dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life
 References: Debian Bug#508307
diff --git a/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/tags 
b/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/tags
index f66af38..1407ec7 100644
--- a/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/tags
+++ b/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/tags
@@ -7,11 +7,11 @@ E: scripts-control-interpreter

[lintian] branch master updated (098ceec -> 06e998d)

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.

  from  098ceec   checks/standards-version.desc: Correct which tag are 
altering.
   new  06e998d   checks/python.desc: Lower the severity of the 
"dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life" tag from normal ("E:") to 
wishlist ("W:") as it is not necessarily actionable by the maintainer. This 
reverts bug #883581. (Closes: #886259)

The 1 revisions listed above as "new" are entirely new to this
repository and will be described in separate emails.  The revisions
listed as "adds" were already present in the repository and have only
been added to this reference.


Summary of changes:
 checks/python.desc|  8 
 debian/changelog  |  6 +-
 t/tests/python-python2-apps/tags  | 12 ++--
 t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc |  2 ++
 t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/tags |  4 ++--
 t/tests/scripts-interpreters/tags |  2 +-
 t/tests/scripts-missing-dep-fp/tags   |  2 +-
 7 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Sean Whitton]

Hello Mattia,

Thanks for your reply.

On Wed, Jan 03 2018, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:

>> ISTM that requiring maintainers to check packages against the
>> upgrading checklist before they can upload other improvements is an
>> example of requiring prerequisite work of volunteers that is not
>> needed for co-ordinating with other volunteers.  So we should not
>> require it.
>
> Agree, we should not require it.  But I believe we should definitely
> (more or less strongly) recommend it.

This is quite tricky.  I think that strongly recommending that someone
do some additional work is likely to have the same negative effect as
requiring them to do it.  This was a central message of Enrico's talk.

Maybe I better word is "encourage"..

-- 
Sean Whitton


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#886259: please downgrade dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life to info or pedantic

[Chris Lamb]

tags 886259 + pending
thanks

Fixed in Git:

  
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=06e998db45cbd874740d12a9e553d74a576703a3


Regards,

-- 
  ,''`.
 : :'  : Chris Lamb
 `. `'`  la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
   `-

Processed: Re: please downgrade dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life to info or pedantic

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> tags 886259 + pending
Bug #886259 [lintian] please downgrade 
dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life to info or pedantic
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
886259: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886259
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Bill Allombert]

On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 02:24:46PM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
> control: severity -1 normal
> 
> Thanks for summarising exactly when these tags are triggered, Mattia.
> 
> Let me first say exactly what change I'd recommend:
> 
> - out-of-date-standards-version should be I: or P: instead of W:
> - ancient-standards-version should remain W:
> - ancient-standards-version should be triggered when S-V contains a
>   release of Policy from the previous stable release cycle
> 
> The third point is mostly covered already because our stable release
> cycles are roughly two years, but possibly there is a better mechanism.
> 
> > They are both warnings, and IMHO they are both totally valid as
> > warnings.  If you update your package you should spend your time
> > checking it is still Policy compliant (how would you know it is
> > otherwise without checking?!), and bumping this tiny field is just a
> > marker you did so.
> >
> > What do you propose to change?  Consider that before this August
> > (i.e., when the Policy editor teams got revamped) Policy releases were
> > fairly rare, and for sure you wouldn't want to wait 2 releases
> > (average of ~3 years, by looking at it) before warning… And honestly I
> > hope it gets back to fewer and smaller releases soon again, as it is
> > honestly hard for me as well to keep up with the changes (I could
> > remember 3.9.{6,7,8} changes by heart, I can't with the latest…).  But
> > it doesn't mean that I as a maintainer should make an effort to keep
> > up and check for Policy compliance at each package update.
> 
> You argue that
> - whenever a maintainer uploads a package and S-V is out-of-date, they
>   should work through the relevant entries in the Policy Manual's
>   Upgrading Checklist
> - Policy Manual releases should be infrequent to avoid maintainers
>   having to do this too often
> 
> On the contrary, I argue that
> - the only thing that should be /required/ when uploading a package is
>   making the package non-trivially better than the current version in
>   unstable
> - updating S-V should never block uploading other improvements
> - there are good reasons to release the Policy Manual frequently, and
>   this should not be blocked by the expectation that everyone respond to
>   those new versions in their very next uploads.

Standards-Version is purely informational. All packages are expected to
comply with the latest policy, and respectively, when policy changes are
proposed, we are careful to check what packages are impacted and what
should be done about them. If the change is minor, often a lintian
warning is enough. Otherwise bugs are reported

So it is not a big problem if one update Standards-Version without actually
checking policy, as long as one check the lintian warnings and the BTS.
On the other hand it should not be done in NMU, because some
maintainers use this field to track of far they checked the
upgrading-checklist file for this package.

So I agree that updating S-V should never block uploading other
improvements.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. 

Imagine a large red swirl here. 

[lintian] 01/01: t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc: List dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life in Test-For, not Test-Against.

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a commit to branch master
in repository lintian.

commit e4e965b52e41bc1880796607336be07c1da64da5
Author: Chris Lamb 
Date:   Wed Jan 3 15:51:44 2018 +

t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc: List 
dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life in Test-For, not 
Test-Against.
---
 t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc 
b/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc
index 41f98c0..633bb05 100644
--- a/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc
+++ b/t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc
@@ -10,6 +10,5 @@ Test-For: control-interpreter-in-usr-local
  preinst-interpreter-without-predepends
  control-interpreter-without-depends
  unknown-control-interpreter
-Test-Against:
  dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life
 References: Debian Bug#508307

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

[lintian] branch master updated (06e998d -> e4e965b)

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.

  from  06e998d   checks/python.desc: Lower the severity of the 
"dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life" tag from normal ("E:") to 
wishlist ("W:") as it is not necessarily actionable by the maintainer. This 
reverts bug #883581. (Closes: #886259)
   new  e4e965b   t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc: List 
dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life in Test-For, not 
Test-Against.

The 1 revisions listed above as "new" are entirely new to this
repository and will be described in separate emails.  The revisions
listed as "adds" were already present in the repository and have only
been added to this reference.


Summary of changes:
 t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

Build failed in Jenkins: lintian-tests_sid #2368

[jenkins]

See 


Changes:

[lamby] checks/python.desc: Lower the severity of the

--
[...truncated 240.00 KB...]
Adding debian:GeoTrust_Global_CA_2.pem
Adding debian:GeoTrust_Global_CA.pem
Adding debian:Entrust_Root_Certification_Authority_-_G2.pem
Adding debian:Entrust_Root_Certification_Authority_-_EC1.pem
Adding debian:Entrust_Root_Certification_Authority.pem
Adding debian:Entrust.net_Premium_2048_Secure_Server_CA.pem
Adding debian:EE_Certification_Centre_Root_CA.pem
Adding debian:EC-ACC.pem
Adding debian:E-Tugra_Certification_Authority.pem
Adding debian:DigiCert_Trusted_Root_G4.pem
Adding debian:DigiCert_High_Assurance_EV_Root_CA.pem
Adding debian:DigiCert_Global_Root_G3.pem
Adding debian:DigiCert_Global_Root_G2.pem
Adding debian:DigiCert_Global_Root_CA.pem
Adding debian:DigiCert_Assured_ID_Root_G3.pem
Adding debian:DigiCert_Assured_ID_Root_G2.pem
Adding debian:DigiCert_Assured_ID_Root_CA.pem
Adding debian:Deutsche_Telekom_Root_CA_2.pem
Adding debian:DST_Root_CA_X3.pem
Adding debian:DST_ACES_CA_X6.pem
Adding debian:D-TRUST_Root_Class_3_CA_2_EV_2009.pem
Adding debian:D-TRUST_Root_Class_3_CA_2_2009.pem
Adding debian:Cybertrust_Global_Root.pem
Adding debian:Comodo_Trusted_Services_root.pem
Adding debian:Comodo_Secure_Services_root.pem
Adding debian:Comodo_AAA_Services_root.pem
Adding debian:China_Internet_Network_Information_Center_EV_Certificates_Root.pem
Adding debian:Chambers_of_Commerce_Root_-_2008.pem
Adding debian:Certum_Trusted_Network_CA_2.pem
Adding debian:Certum_Trusted_Network_CA.pem
Adding debian:Certum_Root_CA.pem
Adding debian:Certplus_Root_CA_G2.pem
Adding debian:Certplus_Root_CA_G1.pem
Adding debian:Certplus_Class_2_Primary_CA.pem
Adding debian:Certinomis_-_Root_CA.pem
Warning: there was a problem reading the certificate file 
/etc/ssl/certs/Certinomis_-_Autorit?_Racine.pem. Message:
  /etc/ssl/certs/Certinomis_-_Autorit?_Racine.pem (No such file or directory)
Adding debian:Certigna.pem
Adding debian:Camerfirma_Global_Chambersign_Root.pem
Adding debian:Camerfirma_Chambers_of_Commerce_Root.pem
Adding debian:COMODO_RSA_Certification_Authority.pem
Adding debian:COMODO_ECC_Certification_Authority.pem
Adding debian:COMODO_Certification_Authority.pem
Adding debian:CNNIC_ROOT.pem
Adding debian:CFCA_EV_ROOT.pem
Adding debian:CA_Disig_Root_R2.pem
Adding debian:CA_Disig_Root_R1.pem
Adding debian:Buypass_Class_3_Root_CA.pem
Adding debian:Buypass_Class_2_Root_CA.pem
Adding debian:Baltimore_CyberTrust_Root.pem
Adding debian:Autoridad_de_Certificacion_Firmaprofesional_CIF_A62634068.pem
Adding debian:Atos_TrustedRoot_2011.pem
Adding debian:Amazon_Root_CA_4.pem
Adding debian:Amazon_Root_CA_3.pem
Adding debian:Amazon_Root_CA_2.pem
Adding debian:Amazon_Root_CA_1.pem
Adding debian:AffirmTrust_Premium_ECC.pem
Adding debian:AffirmTrust_Premium.pem
Adding debian:AffirmTrust_Networking.pem
Adding debian:AffirmTrust_Commercial.pem
Adding debian:AddTrust_Qualified_Certificates_Root.pem
Adding debian:AddTrust_Public_Services_Root.pem
Adding debian:AddTrust_Low-Value_Services_Root.pem
Adding debian:AddTrust_External_Root.pem
Adding debian:Actalis_Authentication_Root_CA.pem
Adding debian:AC_RAIZ_FNMT-RCM.pem
Adding debian:ACEDICOM_Root.pem
Adding debian:ACCVRAIZ1.pem
done.
Setting up openjdk-8-jdk-headless:amd64 (8u151-b12-1) ...
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/idlj to 
provide /usr/bin/idlj (idlj) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/jdeps to 
provide /usr/bin/jdeps (jdeps) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/wsimport to 
provide /usr/bin/wsimport (wsimport) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/rmic to 
provide /usr/bin/rmic (rmic) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/jinfo to 
provide /usr/bin/jinfo (jinfo) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/jsadebugd to 
provide /usr/bin/jsadebugd (jsadebugd) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/native2ascii 
to provide /usr/bin/native2ascii (native2ascii) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/jstat to 
provide /usr/bin/jstat (jstat) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/javac to 
provide /usr/bin/javac (javac) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/javah to 
provide /usr/bin/javah (javah) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/jstack to 
provide /usr/bin/jstack (jstack) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/jrunscript to 
provide /usr/bin/jrunscript (jrunscript) in auto mode
update-alternatives: using /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/javadoc to 
provide /usr/bin/javadoc (javadoc) in auto mod

Jenkins build is back to normal : lintian-tests_sid #2369

[jenkins]

See 

Bug#795261: add a warning for stripped python-*-dbg packages

[Mattia Rizzolo]

On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 10:19:47PM +, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
> 
> > add a warning for stripped python-*-dbg packages
> 
> Do you think we should still implement this now that we have automatic
> debug packages? I would lean towards "no"...

Actually, this seems to be already covered by
library-in-debug-or-profile-should-not-be-stripped, for example here, in
my local WIP package I get:
E: python-libxml2-dbg: library-in-debug-or-profile-should-not-be-stripped 
usr/lib/debug/.build-id/41/7b465dcda87b7241eef0f824b12985e8807139.debug
E: python3-libxml2-dbg: library-in-debug-or-profile-should-not-be-stripped 
usr/lib/debug/.build-id/81/856a797c537c2f1ad0cff65a70d03e7ddb2956.debug


-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540  .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#886271: lintian: do not warn about debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package for python-*-dbg packages

[Mattia Rizzolo]

Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.67

I: libxml2 source: debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package python-libxml2-dbg

That's untrue for python-foo-dbg as those packages not necessarily or
anyway not only contains debug symbols for the python-foo library, but
also has the library build for the debug build of python.

Interestingly, I do not get that tag for the python3 version...

-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540  .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Processed: Re: Bug#795261: add a warning for stripped python-*-dbg packages

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> tag -1 - moreinfo
Bug #795261 [lintian] add a warning for stripped python-*-dbg packages
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.

-- 
795261: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795261
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#795261: add a warning for stripped python-*-dbg packages

[Mattia Rizzolo]

Control: tag -1 - moreinfo

On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 05:48:15PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 10:19:47PM +, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > Hi Matthias,
> > 
> > > add a warning for stripped python-*-dbg packages
> > 
> > Do you think we should still implement this now that we have automatic
> > debug packages? I would lean towards "no"...
> 
> Actually, this seems to be already covered by
> library-in-debug-or-profile-should-not-be-stripped, for example here, in
> my local WIP package I get:
> E: python-libxml2-dbg: library-in-debug-or-profile-should-not-be-stripped 
> usr/lib/debug/.build-id/41/7b465dcda87b7241eef0f824b12985e8807139.debug
> E: python3-libxml2-dbg: library-in-debug-or-profile-should-not-be-stripped 
> usr/lib/debug/.build-id/81/856a797c537c2f1ad0cff65a70d03e7ddb2956.debug

NVM, scratch this, it's just wrong.
Matthias is obviously not referring to the debug symbols of the regular
python library, but the one for the debug build.

So, yes, it is still needed.
See also my just filed #886271 for a related change.

-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540  .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

[lintian] 01/01: data/common/dbg-pkg: Identify both python-foo-dbg and python3-foo-dbg as known debug packages to avoid a false-positive for the former when checking for debian-control-has-obsolete-db

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a commit to branch master
in repository lintian.

commit e00d72353243e0ed77bc4d25d45fc8fbd635a99d
Author: Chris Lamb 
Date:   Wed Jan 3 17:12:19 2018 +

data/common/dbg-pkg: Identify both python-foo-dbg and python3-foo-dbg as 
known debug packages to avoid a false-positive for the former when checking for 
debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package. (Closes: #886271)
---
 data/common/dbg-pkg|  2 +-
 debian/changelog   |  4 
 .../files-python-general/debian/debian/control.in  | 22 ++
 t/tests/files-python-general/desc  |  2 ++
 t/tests/files-python-general/tags  |  1 -
 5 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/data/common/dbg-pkg b/data/common/dbg-pkg
index 9c915f0..d046229 100644
--- a/data/common/dbg-pkg
+++ b/data/common/dbg-pkg
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
 # gcc and valgring need glibc package
 ^libc\d+-dbg$
 # python module build against python debug
-^python\d+-.*-dbg$
+^python\d*-.*-dbg$
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index 6fb354d..6aa540f 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -32,6 +32,10 @@ lintian (2.5.68) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
 + [CL] Downgrade severity of out-of-date-standards-version from normal
   ("W:") to wishlist ("I:").  (Closes: #886210)
 
+  * data/common/dbg-pkg:
++ [CL] Identify both python-foo-dbg and python3-foo-dbg as known debug
+  packages to avoid a false-positive for the former when checking for
+  debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package.  (Closes: #886271)
   * data/files/fnames:
 + [CL] Warn about packages that ship (non-reproducible) Python
   Hypothesis examples.  (Closes: #886101)
diff --git a/t/tests/files-python-general/debian/debian/control.in 
b/t/tests/files-python-general/debian/debian/control.in
index b0a0ffe..bebe5a8 100644
--- a/t/tests/files-python-general/debian/debian/control.in
+++ b/t/tests/files-python-general/debian/debian/control.in
@@ -28,4 +28,26 @@ Description: {$description} - debug
  .
  This is a fake debug package.
 
+Package: python3-modulename
+Architecture: any
+Depends: $\{misc:Depends\}, $\{shlibs:Depends\}
+Description: {$description} (Python 3.x)
+ This is a test package designed to exercise some feature or tag of
+ Lintian.  It is part of the Lintian test suite and may do very odd
+ things.  It should not be installed like a regular package.  It may
+ be an empty package.
+ .
+ Python 3.x version.
 
+Package: python3-modulename-dbg
+Architecture: any
+Section: debug
+Depends: $\{misc:Depends\}, python3-modulename (= $\{binary:Version\}),
+ $\{shlibs:Depends\}
+Description: {$description} - debug (Python 3.x) version
+ This is a test package designed to exercise some feature or tag of
+ Lintian.  It is part of the Lintian test suite and may do very odd
+ things.  It should not be installed like a regular package.  It may
+ be an empty package.
+ .
+ This is a fake Python 3.x debug package.
diff --git a/t/tests/files-python-general/desc 
b/t/tests/files-python-general/desc
index a3788b8..18fb957 100644
--- a/t/tests/files-python-general/desc
+++ b/t/tests/files-python-general/desc
@@ -8,3 +8,5 @@ Test-For:
  package-installs-python-egg
  package-installs-python-pycache-dir
  python-debug-in-wrong-location
+Test-Against:
+  debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package
diff --git a/t/tests/files-python-general/tags 
b/t/tests/files-python-general/tags
index 460213b..233fc0a 100644
--- a/t/tests/files-python-general/tags
+++ b/t/tests/files-python-general/tags
@@ -2,7 +2,6 @@ E: python-kinterbasdb: package-installs-python-bytecode 
usr/share/python-kinterb
 E: python-kinterbasdb: package-installs-python-bytecode 
usr/share/python-kinterbasdb/code.pyo
 E: python-kinterbasdb: package-installs-python-egg 
usr/share/python-kinterbasdb/python.egg
 E: python-kinterbasdb: package-installs-python-pycache-dir 
usr/share/python-kinterbasdb/__pycache__/
-I: files-python-general source: debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package 
python-kinterbasdb-dbg
 W: files-python-general source: 
package-uses-deprecated-debhelper-compat-version 7
 W: files-python-general source: python-foo-but-no-python3-foo 
python-kinterbasdb
 W: files-python-general source: python-foo-but-no-python3-foo 
python-kinterbasdb-dbg

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

[lintian] branch master updated (e4e965b -> e00d723)

[Chris Lamb]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

lamby pushed a change to branch master
in repository lintian.

  from  e4e965b   t/tests/scripts-control-interpreters/desc: List 
dependency-on-python-version-marked-for-end-of-life in Test-For, not 
Test-Against.
   new  e00d723   data/common/dbg-pkg: Identify both python-foo-dbg and 
python3-foo-dbg as known debug packages to avoid a false-positive for the 
former when checking for debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package. (Closes: 
#886271)

The 1 revisions listed above as "new" are entirely new to this
repository and will be described in separate emails.  The revisions
listed as "adds" were already present in the repository and have only
been added to this reference.


Summary of changes:
 data/common/dbg-pkg|  2 +-
 debian/changelog   |  4 
 .../files-python-general/debian/debian/control.in  | 22 ++
 t/tests/files-python-general/desc  |  2 ++
 t/tests/files-python-general/tags  |  1 -
 5 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on 
/srv/git.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git

Processed: Re: lintian: do not warn about debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package for python-*-dbg packages

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> tags 886271 + pending
Bug #886271 [lintian] lintian: do not warn about 
debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package for python-*-dbg packages
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
886271: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886271
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#886271: lintian: do not warn about debian-control-has-obsolete-dbg-package for python-*-dbg packages

[Chris Lamb]

tags 886271 + pending
thanks

Fixed in Git:

  
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=e00d72353243e0ed77bc4d25d45fc8fbd635a99d

(Particularly love how the "real" change is one byte, yet the changelog
and testsuite changes mean that we have a non-trivial diffstat!)


Regards,

-- 
  ,''`.
 : :'  : Chris Lamb
 `. `'`  la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
   `-

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Sean Whitton]

Hello Bill,

On Wed, Jan 03 2018, Bill Allombert wrote:

> Standards-Version is purely informational. All packages are expected
> to comply with the latest policy, and respectively, when policy
> changes are proposed, we are careful to check what packages are
> impacted and what should be done about them. If the change is minor,
> often a lintian warning is enough. Otherwise bugs are reported
>
> So it is not a big problem if one update Standards-Version without
> actually checking policy, as long as one check the lintian warnings
> and the BTS.

You seem to be suggesting that the Policy Editors ensure that for every
change of Policy there is either a new Lintian tag or an MBF?

If that's what you mean, then it's completely false, and if we did
require ourselves to do that, there would never be any releases of
Policy :)

(it is, though, true that we check what packages are impacted and what
should be done about them)

> On the other hand it should not be done in NMU, because some
> maintainers use this field to track of far they checked the
> upgrading-checklist file for this package.

I don't understand what role there could be for the upgrading checklist
if every change has an accompanying Lintian tag or MBF.  Perhaps you
could rephrase this remark about NMUs.

-- 
Sean Whitton


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Chris Lamb]

Hi all,

> > - ancient-standards-version should be triggered when S-V contains a
> >   release of Policy from the previous stable release cycle
> >
[…]
> This sounds good to me.

Same here Is this the consensus view? If so, I can go ahead and make
the change.


Best wishes,

-- 
  ,''`.
 : :'  : Chris Lamb
 `. `'`  la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
   `-

Bug#886219: lintian should be less pedantic about latest policy version

[Russ Allbery]

Chris Lamb  writes:

> Same here Is this the consensus view? If so, I can go ahead and make
> the change.

It seems like the right change to me.  There's a fair amount of background
complaining about updating S-V, and if we ask people to do it less often,
maybe that will die down a bit.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   

Bug#886297: lintian: false positive: autotools-pkg-config-macro-not-cross-compilation-safe

[Theppitak Karoonboonyanan]

Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.67
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,

lintian caught the autotools-pkg-config-macro-not-cross-compilation-safe
tag on my "swath" package just because the AC_PATH_PROG macro appears
in a comment:

https://sources.debian.org/src/swath/0.6.0-1/configure.ac/#line20

The comment lines should be filtered out before checking.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: buster/sid
  APT prefers unstable-debug
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 
'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 4.14.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=th_TH.utf8, LC_CTYPE=th_TH.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8), 
LANGUAGE=th_TH.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages lintian depends on:
ii  binutils  2.29.1-12
ii  bzip2 1.0.6-8.1
ii  diffstat  1.61-1+b1
ii  dpkg  1.19.0.4
ii  file  1:5.32-1
ii  gettext   0.19.8.1-4
ii  intltool-debian   0.35.0+20060710.4
ii  libapt-pkg-perl   0.1.33
ii  libarchive-zip-perl   1.60-1
ii  libclass-accessor-perl0.51-1
ii  libclone-perl 0.39-1
ii  libdpkg-perl  1.19.0.4
ii  libemail-valid-perl   1.202-1
ii  libfile-basedir-perl  0.07-1
ii  libipc-run-perl   0.96-1
ii  liblist-moreutils-perl0.416-1+b3
ii  libparse-debianchangelog-perl 1.2.0-12
ii  libperl5.26 [libdigest-sha-perl]  5.26.1-3
ii  libtext-levenshtein-perl  0.13-1
ii  libtimedate-perl  2.3000-2
ii  liburi-perl   1.72-2
ii  libxml-simple-perl2.24-1
ii  libyaml-libyaml-perl  0.63-2+b2
ii  man-db2.7.6.1-4
ii  patchutils0.3.4-2
ii  perl  5.26.1-3
ii  t1utils   1.41-2
ii  xz-utils  5.2.2-1.3

Versions of packages lintian recommends:
ii  libperlio-gzip-perl  0.19-1+b4

Versions of packages lintian suggests:
pn  binutils-multiarch 
ii  dpkg-dev   1.19.0.4
ii  libhtml-parser-perl3.72-3+b2
pn  libtext-template-perl  

-- no debconf information

Bug#886303: lintian: python-foo-but-no-python3-foo false positive

[Scott Kitterman]

Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.67
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,

As you can see on lintian.d.o [1], qscintilla2 has:

 W python-foo-but-no-python3-foo

python-qscintilla2
python-qscintilla2-dbg

This is literally true, but not useful.  There is no python3-qscintilla2, but
there is python3-pyqt4.qsci (and -dbg).  There's nothing to do here.  The
python and python3 names don't match exactly because the python names don't
match the Python Policy requirements, but it was decided to be more trouble
than it was worth to go back and change it.

I would suggest that instead of the check looking for an exact match for
python-foo and python3-foo, it should be enough to check that if there is
python3-*, it is sufficient.  AIUI, the purpose of this tag is to highlite
packages missing python3 support and that is enough.  Assume the maintainer
added the appropriate python3 names as needed.

Scott K


[1] 
https://lintian.debian.org/maintainer/python-modules-t...@lists.alioth.debian.org.html#qscintilla2