Review guidelines and rpmlint

[Patrice Dumas]

On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 02:22:16PM -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote:
> 
> If you look closely, rpmlint output is separated into warnings (W:) and
> errors (E:). Just like a C compiler.

If I remember well Ville said that the difference between W and E was
quite arbitrary. 

> Errors MUST be fixed to pass review. (Or to pass the upcoming
> rpmlint-after-build test)

Some errors have to be ignored (from the top of my head, errors about
setuid binaries, for example).

> Warnings can be ignored IF (BIG IF) there is reasonable justification.
> For example, the common "no documentation" warning with sub-packages
> such as -devel. Often all documentation goes into the main package, and
> there's nothing suited to go in the -devel package.

In my opinion it should be like that for W and E rpmlint messages 
indistinctly. Maybe E may be scrutated more, but it isn't obvious either.

--
Pat