Bug#989912: libregexp-pattern-license-perl: No deterministic results are provided

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Walter Lozano (2021-06-16 04:12:23)
> On 6/15/21 9:17 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Quoting Walter Lozano (2021-06-15 20:42:53)
> >> As as user of licensecheck I found it does not provide 
> >> deterministic results on some circumstances. And example of this is 
> >> gnutls28/m4/ax_code_coverage.m4 which is detected as UNKNOWN or 
> >> LGPL.
> >>
> >> After some debugging I found that the root cause could be in 
> >> libregexp-pattern-license-perl, I have proposed a fix which you 
> >> can find in
> >>
> >> https://salsa.debian.org/perl-team/modules/packages/libregexp-pattern-license-
> >> perl/-/merge_requests/1
> >>
> >> I hope you can help me to clarify this issue.
> > Great - thanks a lot!
> >
> > I suspect that this might be bug#982849.
> 
> Yes, it looks exactly the same issue I faced. I hope you can confirm 
> and fix it

I will certainly do that.


> > Please keep all conversation about the bug here - *not* at salsa.
> 
> Perfect, I will do that. To be honest I was not sure how to submit the 
> proposed fix, I also tried to submitted directly to
> 
> https://salsa.debian.org/build-common-team/regexp-pattern-license
> 
> but I was not able to see a way to send a MR.
> 
> Please advice what is the best way to contribute.

Sorry, I am aware that reporting issues can be confusing, and am happy 
that you figured out _some_ way to get your findings across.

I use salsa.debian.org as a place to publicly store the git repo but 
*not* to track issues or negotiate change proposals or run continuous 
integration tests or any other of the many things that Gitlab can do.

I use bugs.debian.org to track issues.

Best way to report and discuss issues is to use bugs.debian.org, and 
best way to propose a change is to attach a patch to an email sent to an 
issue tracked in bugs.debian.org.

As you are already aware, some parts of Licensecheck is maintained in 
other libraries.  Git repos exist separately for Debian packaging and 
upstream development of these libraries, but that should not matter for 
issue tracking.

E.g. https://metacpan.org/dist/App-Licensecheck/view/bin/licensecheck 
and https://metacpan.org/dist/App-Licensecheck links to 
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=licensecheck for issue 
reporting, and https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting covers issue 
reporting in Debian.

I find it unhelpful that salsa.debian.org by default enables duplicate 
issue tracking services, and I disable those to limit the risk of 
confusion - but sometimes I forget that, and also sometimes others that 
I collaborate with may disagree and (re)enable them.

If you have suggestions for ways I could maybe improve communicating how 
to best report issues, then please do share.


Kind regards,

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-perl-maintainers/attachments/20210616/1e943736/attachment.sig>