On 24-08-2022 10:08, zimoun wrote: > Hi Vagrant, > > On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 at 15:22, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > >> But, because there is no way to silence a particular inappropriate >> suggestion from guix lint, it becomes noise, and each person evaluating >> the results of the package in the future then needs to take time to >> figure out if guix lint is wrong, or something should be changed. > Do you have some packages as example? In order to be concrete about the > false-positive and how to programatically fix them. > > For instance, do you mean exclude on specific checker for one specific > package? Or teach one specific checker for one specific package in > order to avoid an error specific to this package running this specific > checker? Myself (not Vagrant) I was thinking of the gnu-description linter. IIRC, there was some package where I proposed to modify the description a little to be more informative and fit better in Guix, but then the gnu-description proposed to use the upstream description. Consequently, it was decided to use the original, IMO worse, description. Unfortunately I cannot find the relevant e-mails anymore. This was a true positive, not a false positive, but I think it would have been useful to silence the linter there anyway. At least for these kind of cases, I would go for a package property (properties '((silence-linters gnu-description))). Greetings, Maxime.