remove rpmlint no-documentation warning on -devel subpackages?

[Ian Chapman]

Ville Skyttä wrote:

>>I've been thinking of doing something exactly like that for the last few 
>>days, I'd be interested in helping out.
> 
> 
> Note that rpmlint itself contains some instructions and explanations for
> its findings, improvements to those are welcome.  In fact IMHO it would
> be better to direct the effort at those first, then add a Wiki page if
> still needed.
> 
> Too bad lots of people don't seem to be aware of rpmlint's -i and -I
> options (see the man page), ideas how to make them more prominent?
> 

I'm largely in agreement with Jason. I think the more dynamic nature of 
a wiki would mean that people could edit the info and have access to it 
quicker without waiting for rpmlint releases. A wiki probably has the 
luxury of allowing explanations and resolutions to be more verbose. This 
doesn't mean of course that the information can't eventually make its 
way into rpmlint. I think the wiki would also expose what's consider 
common or good practice for fixing many issues. I'm not sure you could 
make the -i/-I options more prominent. Perhaps if rpmlint finds a 
problem and these options haven't been used, it could print a message 
saying something like "use -i / -I for more information" although that 
might be considered as being too noisy.

-- 
Ian Chapman.