Build failed in Jenkins: lintian-tests_buster #130

See Changes: [lamby] Avoid false positives in missing source checks for "CSS Browser -- [...truncated 7.89 KB...] > git rev-parse refs/tags/1.23.21^{commit} #

Processed: Re: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 874381 + pending Bug #874381 [lintian] lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 874381:

Bug#874381: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

tags 874381 + pending thanks Fixed in Git: https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=72d95b8ee796cafcdc05d4c612d1b435b9c37302 Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk `-

[lintian] branch master updated (57f7770 -> 72d95b8)

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. lamby pushed a change to branch master in repository lintian. from 57f7770 Set correct Section: in testsuite to appease new section mappings added in c85f00e3806. new 72d95b8 Avoid false positives in missing

[lintian] 01/01: Avoid false positives in missing source checks for "CSS Browser Selector". (Closes: #874381)

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. lamby pushed a commit to branch master in repository lintian. commit 72d95b8ee796cafcdc05d4c612d1b435b9c37302 Author: Chris Lamb Date: Tue Sep 5 22:24:35 2017 +0100 Avoid false positives in missing

Bug#874381: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 02:03:31PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > I can believe the same thing about this JavaScript, though. It's not > really that long, an editor is going to hard-wrap the line, and I bet most > changes are just adding an additional condition. > > I'd be inclined to just

Bug#874381: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

Chris Lamb writes: >> I have the same question about procmail, though. Some developers have >> very... odd code preferences. > Glancing at the code briefly, whilst the code style under src/ is, err, > "unique" it at least looks potentially modifiable… > The patches labelled

Confira os palestrantes do Painel Futuro! | Interconf 2017

Interconf e Goiás Genética! De 16 a 23 de Setembro no Parque de Exposições Pedro Ludovico Teixeira.

Bug#874381: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

Hi Russ, > I have the same question about procmail, though. Some developers have > very... odd code preferences. Glancing at the code briefly, whilst the code style under src/ is, err, "unique" it at least looks potentially modifiable… The patches labelled as debian/patches/\d\d seem a little

Global Gaming Expo 2017

Hello, I am writing this to check, if you would like to acquire the attendee contacts of G2E 2017 - Global Gaming Expo Attendees list? We can provide you with 23,500 attendee contacts with their complete details (First Name, Middle Name, Last Name, Company, Web site/URL, Contact number, Fax

Bug#874381: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

Chris Lamb writes: > I still might question whether css_browser_selector.js (ie. non "_dev") > is really source code in any meaningful sense of the word. At the very > least, how does upstream make any changes or bug fixes? I have the same question about procmail, though.

Bug#874381: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

Hi Julian, > > > > https://github.com/rafaelp/css_browser_selector/blob/master/css_browser_selector_dev.js > > No, that's a completely different piece of code. Good grief, that's extremely confusing. For others following along:

Bug#874381: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 05:28:47PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: > Hey Juliam. > > > false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js > > Is it? I don't want to start haggling over the interpretation of > "preferred form for modification", but surely this is the "source": > > >

Bug#874381: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

Hey Juliam. > false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js Is it? I don't want to start haggling over the interpretation of "preferred form for modification", but surely this is the "source":

Bug#874381: lintian: false-positive source-is-missing bug for css_browser_selector.js

Package: lintian Version: 2.5.52 Severity: normal Hi there, lintian gives a false-positive source-is-missing for css_browser_selector.js (though in my case the file has been renamed). The upstream source is https://github.com/rafaelp/css_browser_selector/ and the original source is just one

Bug#760021: lintian: check for not wrap-and-sort formatted files

Hi Mattia, > Lintian recently already "regressed" in its "policy" of not being too > nagging. Already there are tags that I've been ignoring because too > annoying and way too often too hard or impossible to accomplish > (upstream gpg sig and autopkgtest come to my mind). Please file a bug for

Jenkins build is back to normal : lintian-tests_stretch #1059

See

Bug#760021: lintian: check for not wrap-and-sort formatted files

On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 09:04:45AM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: > Mattia convinced me, alas. Yes, not even at the "P:" level. Perhaps I'm > stuck on thinking about the implementation... Lintian recently already "regressed" in its "policy" of not being too nagging. Already there are tags that I've

Jenkins build is back to normal : lintian-tests_sid #1908

See

Build failed in Jenkins: lintian-tests_stretch #1058

See Changes: [lamby] Revert "Apply patch from Boud Roukema to improve the description of the [lamby] c/binaries: Improve LFS tag description [lamby] Re-add changelog entry; was removed as part of commit

[lintian] 01/01: Set correct Section: in testsuite to appease new section mappings added in c85f00e3806.

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. lamby pushed a commit to branch master in repository lintian. commit 57f777079ef0d8f2323bcbc11c15cec4acf08f11 Author: Chris Lamb Date: Tue Sep 5 11:02:46 2017 +0100 Set correct Section: in testsuite to

[lintian] branch master updated (c85f00e -> 57f7770)

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. lamby pushed a change to branch master in repository lintian. from c85f00e Apply patch from Guillem Jover to add more section mappings. (Closes: #874121) new 57f7770 Set correct Section: in testsuite to

Build failed in Jenkins: lintian-tests_sid #1907

See Changes: [lamby] Apply patch from Guillem Jover to add more section mappings. (Closes: -- [...truncated 239.05 KB...] Adding

Bug#874121: lintian: Please add more packagename to section mappings

tags 874121 + pending thanks > Shouldn't this be "libs" … ? > > Indeed, attached a revised version with some other corrections > included. Applied. I've also updated the testsuite to match:

Processed: Re: lintian: Please add more packagename to section mappings

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 874121 + pending Bug #874121 [lintian] lintian: Please add more packagename to section mappings Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 874121:

[lintian] 01/01: Apply patch from Guillem Jover to add more section mappings. (Closes: #874121)

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. lamby pushed a commit to branch master in repository lintian. commit c85f00e3806852db8d8adbe4cd6b94f73b0424cf Author: Guillem Jover Date: Mon Sep 4 22:18:56 2017 +0100 Apply patch from Guillem Jover to

[lintian] branch master updated (fd9b64b -> c85f00e)

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. lamby pushed a change to branch master in repository lintian. from fd9b64b Restyle Ref attribute for binary-file-built-without-LFS-support. new c85f00e Apply patch from Guillem Jover to add more section

[lintian] 01/01: Restyle Ref attribute for binary-file-built-without-LFS-support.

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. lamby pushed a commit to branch master in repository lintian. commit fd9b64be6a246a72a997e2612c6d6e6a9a7813e5 Author: Chris Lamb Date: Mon Sep 4 22:22:51 2017 +0100 Restyle Ref attribute for

[lintian] branch master updated (ccb179c -> fd9b64b)

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. lamby pushed a change to branch master in repository lintian. from ccb179c spelling: Add another correction new fd9b64b Restyle Ref attribute for binary-file-built-without-LFS-support. The 1 revisions listed

Bug#760021: lintian: check for not wrap-and-sort formatted files

Hi Eric & Mattia, > you could check a number of variations >From a practical point of view; how, exactly? Shelling out to wrap-and-sort doesn't seem kosher :) > > Summing up: I don't think it's a practise ready to be nudged by lintian > > yet. > > Not even at the pedantic level? Mattia