On 25/05/18 12:24, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 12:16:20PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> On 25/05/18 12:09, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: >>> autoremoval mails contains tons of false positive and cases where >>> regular package maintainers can do nothing about but watch. >> >> Can you give some examples of false positives in autoremoval mails? >> >> Do you mean the case where you just fixed your package but the information >> hasn't reached the service and so you still get a mail about it? > > That, yes. > But rather than false positive I should have said "things a maintainer > can usually do ~nothing about", like RC bugs on other package where NMUs > are infaseable, or the migration is blocked by some transition, etc (in > those case it's not like the information is false, it's simply not > useful).
Even if there's not much one can do in some cases, I think it's still useful to know that your package is scheduled for autoremoval. > Anyway, doesn't really change my point that the autopkgtest mails are > welcome to me :) Certainly. Cheers, Emilio
