Control: reopen -1
> > Did you see a d/changelog that triggered the latter but not the former?
>
> Yes:packagename (upstreamversion-1~wtf1)
> followed by packagename (upstreamversion-1)
>
> (or even ~bpo10+1, when there was not the word “backport” in the
> changelog text)
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020, Felix Lechner wrote:
> > - latest-debian-changelog-entry-reuses-existing-version checks that
^^^
> > - latest-debian-changelog-entry-without-new-version checks that the
Hi Thorsten,
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 6:50 AM Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
> - latest-debian-changelog-entry-reuses-existing-version checks that
> the version without the epoch is never reused, for the archive and
> snapshots to be consistent (as the epoch is not used in filenames)
>
> -
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > latest-debian-changelog-entry-without-new-version
> > latest-debian-changelog-entry-reuses-existing-version
> I just checked that they don't have different severities which could
> have been a justification for different tags (they don't).
Umm…
Hi Felix,
> During the conversion of the test suite to source format 3.0, some
> packages emitted both tags
>
> latest-debian-changelog-entry-without-new-version
> latest-debian-changelog-entry-reuses-existing-version
>
> According to the tag descriptions, the second tag strips the
Hi Felix,
> During the conversion of the test suite to source format 3.0, some
> packages emitted both tags
>
> latest-debian-changelog-entry-without-new-version
> latest-debian-changelog-entry-reuses-existing-version
>
> According to the tag descriptions, the second tag strips the
Package: lintian
Severity: minor
Hi,
During the conversion of the test suite to source format 3.0, some
packages emitted both tags
latest-debian-changelog-entry-without-new-version
latest-debian-changelog-entry-reuses-existing-version
According to the tag descriptions, the second tag
7 matches
Mail list logo
