Hi s3v, This message only deals with your supplemental question about geany-plugins.
On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 3:21 AM s3v <c0llap...@yahoo.it> wrote: > > duplicate-short-description was not emitted for geany-plugins despite there > are > two binary packages with the same short description. That tag is emitted locally: $ dget https://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/geany-plugins/geany-plugins_1.36+dfsg-1.dsc $ frontend/lintian geany-plugins_1.36+dfsg-1.dsc I: geany-plugins source: debian-watch-uses-insecure-uri http://plugins.geany.org/geany-plugins/geany-plugins-(.*).tar.gz I: geany-plugins source: duplicate-short-description geany-plugin-git-changebar geany-plugin-keyrecord I: geany-plugins source: out-of-date-standards-version 4.1.2 (released 2017-11-30) (current is 4.4.1) I: geany-plugins source: public-upstream-key-not-minimal upstream/signing-key.asc has 125 extra signature(s) for keyid B507ACD04BA283C9 I: geany-plugins source: public-upstream-key-not-minimal upstream/signing-key.asc has 16 extra signature(s) for keyid FBD5225B588752A1 I: geany-plugins source: testsuite-autopkgtest-missing I: geany-plugins source: unused-file-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright paragraph at line 80 I: geany-plugins source: unused-override file-contains-fixme-placeholder debian/control:124 FIXME I: geany-plugins source: wildcard-matches-nothing-in-dep5-copyright geanylatex/* (paragraph at line 75) I: geany-plugins source: wildcard-matches-nothing-in-dep5-copyright geanylatex/src/geanylatex.c (paragraph at line 80) P: geany-plugins source: insecure-copyright-format-uri http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ P: geany-plugins source: package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version 9 P: geany-plugins source: rules-requires-root-missing > I don't see geany-plugins in > https://lintian.debian.org/tags/duplicate-short-description.html The web page states at the top that not all occurrences were shown. Perhaps that message could be clearer: * only 1024 instances are listed on this page. > Could I open new bug report? In general, it is probably better to open a separate report. The bug number issue is not something you or I can do anything about; perhaps they can encode it in base64 to make it shorter. Also, bugs regularly are no bugs at all, so that is not offensive. For complex secondary issues, we will duplicate and retitle your report. Either way is fine. Thanks for helping to make Lintian better. We will get back to you shortly on your main question. Kind regards Felix Lechner
