tags 857123 + pending
thanks
> I don't see the point in keeping the check in its current state, so
> better remove it for now until someone who really works with Java
> packages comes up with a better plan.
Sure. Better to be able to "trust" Lintian and, of course, we can easily
revert it later i
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
Hey,
I am the bug reporter and asked that question, so I'm not quite sure
what else is needed to resolve this issue.
I don't see the point in keeping the check in its current state, so
better remove it for now until someone who really works with Java
packages comes up
tags 857123 + moreinfo
thanks
> Can someone give a concrete example?
(Tagging as moreinfo...)
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
`-
Am 06.07.2017 um 21:21 schrieb Niels Thykier:
> Hi,
>
> Can we do anything to improve its detection accuracy? If not, I suspect
> it might be better to simply remove the check if newer packaging
> practises have made it (mostly) obsolete.
I'm not sure. For Maven projects the check could be remov
On Wed, 8 Mar 2017 10:32:18 +0100 Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 8/03/2017 à 10:19, Markus Koschany a écrit :
>
> > I suggest to remove this Lintian tag or lower the severity from
> > warning to info.
>
> +1 for lowering the severity to info.
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>
>
Hi,
Can we do anything to
Le 8/03/2017 à 10:19, Markus Koschany a écrit :
> I suggest to remove this Lintian tag or lower the severity from
> warning to info.
+1 for lowering the severity to info.
Emmanuel Bourg
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.50.1
Severity: normal
Hi,
I think the Lintian warning about a "missing classpath" in Java
libraries and applications is not very helpful at the moment.
Newcomers and even seasoned Java developers are either confused by it
or simply ignore it thus its usefulness is gr
7 matches
Mail list logo
