[MacPorts Lint] Portfile Lint Errors for: dpkg

[Landon Fuller]

On Feb 6, 2008, at 13:23, Ryan Schmidt wrote:

> There is no detriment that I can discern by naming patchfiles  
> "patch-*.diff" as port lint recommends. There is a detriment by not  
> following this convention which has been discussed at length before  
> on the list.

There is a detriment. The patchfiles aren't syntax hilighted as C,  
and instead are hilighted as a patch file. This is purely a matter of  
personal preference, which is a bad reason to dictate policy.

> This warning has been in port lint for quite some time already.  
> It's just now been made an automated email.

Yes, and getting an e-mail about something I don't think is a problem  
is frustrating.

-landonf
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20080206/b760a97b/PGP.bin