On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 03:24:03AM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 02:28:19AM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > Bold suggestion: what about getting the overrides-responsibility towards > > lintian, and not the packages... of course, for backwards compatibility > > and to cope with impatiant maintainers, the current way should keep > > working, only emitting a I: about getting lintian-maintainers to add the > > override to lintian... Noticing bad tests becomes easier then too. > > ohh, come on. In unstable we have currently about 800 override files > (and we haven't even implemented overrides for source packages!) > _I_ don't want to maintain these files and check for every new upload > if the overrides are still needed. Adding additional redirections > normally don't provides better accuracy... Let's just don't do it, okay?
I agree. This seems like a retrograde step: it was *good* when overrides were pushed out to packages after originally having been maintained in lintian. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
