1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.DEVEL.QA

  • future of lintian.d.o?

    From Holger Levsen@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 22 13:40:02 2022
    hi,

    first: it's great that lintian is under active development again!
    second: it's great that UDD now has up2date information from current lintian runs!

    (I've bcc:ed [email protected] and [email protected] out of courtesy, so they see this but
    won't get every reply cc:ed.)

    Now my questions, as raised on #debian-qa:

    < h01ger> lintian.d.o used to show verbose information how to fix those issues
    found. now on eg https://udd.debian.org/lintian/?packages=munin
    i cannot find that. are there plans to add this back?
    < h01ger> and is there a bug tracker for udd.d.o/lintian?
    < h01ger> and are there plans to shutdown lintian.d.o or redirect it to
    udd.d.o/lintian?


    The 2nd question I could answer myself by now: https://wiki.debian.org/UltimateDebianDatabase/ is pointed out in the footer
    of every UDD page, and that pages points to https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=udd;[email protected]
    for UDD bugs.

    Shall I just file a bug for question 1 and 3?


    --
    cheers,
    Holger

    ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
    ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
    ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
    ⠈⠳⣄

    Historians have a word for Germans who joined the Nazi party, not because they hated Jews, but out of hope for restored patriotism, or a sense of economic anxiety, or a hope to preserve their religious values, or dislike of their opponents, or raw political opportunism, or convenience, or ignorance, or greed.
    That word is "Nazi". Nobody cares about their motives anymore.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEuL9UE3sJ01zwJv6dCRq4VgaaqhwFAmMDabkACgkQCRq4Vgaa qhywJw//XJ0sboH1eytNcL/lxn+xFbaUhdjDNGHoR7a5G/63Lf0FHkbLwTw4HkPj 5ExVD9mHlDa49ywoQs0adhwdAjdhS0kxbjJxvDijQYYAlU6E2zQY6hCYvLpVxwtk KKHl1BVHoyoRAMrR7ZSJRqwcA+xukFxs8avw2CWPQjb0B1DYPpmb1pSG6QsY+OH/ 8eZB5ZY+juNCYcuB1sq7prZZQcpPTr/2i6U2m+bIhUKLZ5CEhzyNIfpz4NFD/3BA OxEbCD5Q6n17AXpBNruA7gWj8upiPoo64ite8gu11ENFpTrAg5Q
  • From Lucas Nussbaum@21:1/5 to Holger Levsen on Mon Aug 22 14:50:02 2022
    Hi Holger,

    On 22/08/22 at 11:34 +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
    hi,

    first: it's great that lintian is under active development again!
    second: it's great that UDD now has up2date information from current lintian runs!

    (I've bcc:ed [email protected] and [email protected] out of courtesy, so they see this but won't get every reply cc:ed.)

    Now my questions, as raised on #debian-qa:

    < h01ger> lintian.d.o used to show verbose information how to fix those issues
    found. now on eg https://udd.debian.org/lintian/?packages=munin
    i cannot find that. are there plans to add this back?
    < h01ger> and is there a bug tracker for udd.d.o/lintian?
    < h01ger> and are there plans to shutdown lintian.d.o or redirect it to
    udd.d.o/lintian?


    The 2nd question I could answer myself by now: https://wiki.debian.org/UltimateDebianDatabase/ is pointed out in the footer of every UDD page, and that pages points to https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=udd;[email protected]
    for UDD bugs.

    Shall I just file a bug for question 1 and 3?

    Questions 1 and 3 are related.

    I asked DSA about lintian.d.o in https://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2022/07/msg00006.html but got no
    reply yet.

    I think that the verbose information you mention is the one provided by 'lintian -i' or 'lintian-explain-tags'. It would be easy to add that information to UDD (and then expose it on the web interface), but I'd
    like to see the future of lintian.d.o clarified first so that efforts
    are not duplicated.

    There's also the question of whether UDD should provide a tag-centric
    view in addition to the current maintainer/package-centric view.
    (see also #1016188). I haven't made up my mind about it. The counter
    argument is that it's quite easy to just use SQL if you want to find
    packages affected by a specific tag.

    Lucas

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Axel Beckert@21:1/5 to Holger Levsen on Mon Aug 22 14:50:01 2022
    Hi Holger,

    Holger Levsen wrote:
    first: it's great that lintian is under active development again!

    Sorry for that month of silence. This was two weeks of holidays where
    I did way less for Debian than I expected plus some pre- and
    post-holiday stress.

    I just restarted working on Lintian this weekend. There are though
    some throw backs due to the dpatch removal and the quite broken GNU
    Emacs 28.1 which both affect the test suite and autopkgtests.

    second: it's great that UDD now has up2date information from current lintian runs!

    (I've bcc:ed [email protected] and [email protected] out of courtesy, so they see this but won't get every reply cc:ed.)

    Thanks! Worked. :-)

    Please also take also [email protected] into Cc for such
    things. I've added that address now.

    Now my questions, as raised on #debian-qa:

    < h01ger> and are there plans to shutdown lintian.d.o or redirect it to
    udd.d.o/lintian?

    In my head there is the fallback plan to map all existing lintian.d.o
    URLs (at least those for tags, packages and maintainers) to
    udd.d.o/lintian URLs (either via proxy or redirect) in case nobody
    picks up the lintian.d.o code.

    We're though far from an implementation of that idea.

    Regards, Axel
    --
    ,''`. | Axel Beckert <[email protected]>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
    : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
    `. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
    `- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Axel Beckert@21:1/5 to Lucas Nussbaum on Sat Aug 27 23:50:01 2022
    Hi Lucas,

    [sorry for the late reply, wrote this mail a few days ago, but forgot
    to actually send it.]

    Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
    There's also the question of whether UDD should provide a tag-centric
    view in addition to the current maintainer/package-centric view.

    Any lintian.d.o replacement will need that.

    The tag-centric views are e.g. the primary purpose of Lintian's
    classification tags (plus statistics via SQL, yeah).

    Additionally they're commonly used to assess how many of Debian's
    packages are affected by an issue, e.g. when deciding to sunset e.g. a debhelper feature/compat level or a lintian tag itself.

    A quick view on one of these pages is way faster than first to have to
    figure out the proper SQL statements for that and still gives a good
    estimate.

    At least I myself look way more often into the tag-centric lintian.d.o
    pages than any other lintian.d.o page because it's the easiest way to
    lookup or link to a long tag description, e.g. for online
    documentation purposes or sending the description to someone by
    e-mail.

    Hence from my point of view, if UDD can't also provide a tag centric
    view for every tag, it can't replace lintian.d.o at some point in the future.

    The counter argument is that it's quite easy to just use SQL if you
    want to find packages affected by a specific tag.

    Why is that a counter argument? I would expect that's an argument
    _for_ implementing it. :-)

    Regards, Axel
    --
    ,''`. | Axel Beckert <[email protected]>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
    : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
    `. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
    `- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)