Bug#889814: lintian: Improve long description of epoch-change-without-comment

2018-02-07 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 12:12:11 +0100, Raphaël Hertzog wrote: > Package: lintian > Version: 2.5.73 > Severity: wishlist > It would be nice if the long description of epoch-change-without-comment > could document when it's appropriate to bump the epoch and ways to avoid > the epoch bump

Bug#889814: lintian: Improve long description of epoch-change-without-comment

2018-02-07 Thread Chris Lamb
tags 889814 + pending thanks Fixed in Git, pending upload: https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=2a7f83e0fb26b06d2e4f5ea0f4fb97390eafb2d7 Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk `-

Bug#889814: lintian: Improve long description of epoch-change-without-comment

2018-02-07 Thread Jeremy Bicha
To help reduce the need to use an epoch later, I think we should recommend packages with date-based numbering use a version number prefixed with something like 0~. For instance, the current version of fonts-noto-color-emoji in Debian is 0~20180102-1. This could possibly be a Lintian warning if a

Bug#889814: lintian: Improve long description of epoch-change-without-comment

2018-02-07 Thread Raphaël Hertzog
Package: lintian Version: 2.5.73 Severity: wishlist It would be nice if the long description of epoch-change-without-comment could document when it's appropriate to bump the epoch and ways to avoid the epoch bump entirely. I'm thinking of: - upstream changed version numbering scheme in a way