Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1283397

Bug#884135: qa.debian.org: UDD should honor comment-only watch file

From Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.bugs.dist, linux.debian.devel.qa
Subject Bug#884135: qa.debian.org: UDD should honor comment-only watch file
Date 2026-02-24 02:50 +0100
Message-ID <MrPIJ-2RK2-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <uVCyJ-1nB-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <uVCyJ-1nB-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Hi!

[ CCing Lucas for UDD, and Christoph for DDPO. ]

On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 20:59:55 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Package: qa.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: qa.debian.org@packages.debian.org

> Multiple of my packages do not have a proper URL to watch. Lintian suggest to
> add a watch file with comments, and uscan handles those gracefully. UDD
> turns them into an error on line 106 in rimporters/upstream.rb.
> 
> Please improve UDD to treat "empty" watch files as they are meant to be by
> people that follow Lintian's advice.

I think using the new watch format 5 with its "Untrackable:" field
support is probably a more explicit way to handle this, which is what
I've switched the couple of packages that I maintain that are in this
same situation.

To try to improve this I tried to modify both UDD and DDPO, to track
and show these as a new status, and show on DDPO in gray to avoid
creating the current alarming red upper-case entries, which seem wrong
given that I don't think these packages should be worse-off than ones
with no watch file included.

The attached two patches try to implement this, but they are
completely untested. I guess the one in UDD could be massaged to also
include the watch format 4 with only comments (originally requested in
this report), by checking in the same if/else case that none of the
fields are present (given that the previous cases handle non-existing
watch file).

(I've also provided an MR for lintian updating its recommendation to
use format 5 with
<https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/merge_requests/668>)

Thanks,
Guillem

Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist | Previous | Next | Find similar


Thread

Bug#884135: qa.debian.org: UDD should honor comment-only watch file Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2026-02-24 02:50 +0100

csiph-web