Bug#883772: lintian: please don't map implementation language to sections

[Altering Subject to match updated bug title] Hi Guillem & David, > I'd rather we fixed the actual problem here with elpa, instead of > lowering it from W to I. In addition to my mass overrides, I was happy > to see that we could slowly course-correct the Section degradation via > lintian, but

Bug#883772: lintian: please don't map implementation language to sections

tags 883772 + pending thanks Hi David, > In case you consider the previous not constructive ;), what about > lowering the severity to "pedantic"? Again, I share your opinion about the entire section thing, just that a bug against Lintian is the best forum for such a discussion :) Lets downgrade

Bug#883772: lintian: please don't map implementation language to sections

Chris Lamb writes: > Hey David! > >> the programming-language sections are a mess > > Whilst I don't necessarily disagree, I'm not sure what the next steps > for Lintian are here. > > Putting it another way, I see you linked #802488 but until that gets > some kind of resolution

Bug#883772: lintian: please don't map implementation language to sections

tags 883772 + moreinfo thanks Hey David! > the programming-language sections are a mess Whilst I don't necessarily disagree, I'm not sure what the next steps for Lintian are here. Putting it another way, I see you linked #802488 but until that gets some kind of resolution (or some change to