Package: ftp.debian.org
Dear developer, there is some divergence between priority information in Packages.xz file and priority field in binary .deb file. E.g. (from Packages.xz) Package: allure Version: 0.8.3.0-3 Installed-Size: 36600 Maintainer: Debian Haskell Group <pkg-haskell-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org> [...] Section: games Priority: extra ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (from binary package) $ dpkg-deb -I allure_0.8.3.0-3_amd64.deb | grep Priority Priority: optional ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (from Packages.xz) Package: 4digits Source: 4digits (1.1.4-1) Version: 1.1.4-1+b1 Installed-Size: 679 Maintainer: Yongzhi Pan <panyong...@gmail.com> [...] Section: games Priority: optional ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (from binary package) $ dpkg -I 4digits_1.1.4-1+b1_amd64.deb | grep Priority Priority: extra ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ more context at #928992 [1]. I think content of Packages.xz file does need to be fully reliable because this file is parsed by DDTP [2] for: - obtaining the priority of Debian packages - creating a numeric priority on a basis of "official" priority and some other internal criteria - populating his database with this information - automatically fetching package descriptions with highest priority - providing these descriptions to translators Currently, results presented at the end of this workflow are not what they seem and translators spend their time to translate descriptions that do actually have priority lower than what DDTP says. Please, can you provide a Packages.xz file that rightly reflects the binary package priority? I hope this is the proper place for reporting this issue; if not, please redirect me on the right way. Moreover, I have no idea about the process that does build packages file, maybe this behaviour is expected? If so, please adjust the severity or close this bug as well. Thanks a lot for your work. Kind regards. [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=928992 [2] http://ddtp2.debian.net/stats/stats-sid.html
