On Sat, 2025-02-22 at 12:47 +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote: > On 22.02.25 09:25, Sébastien Noel wrote: > > Control: tags -1 -moreinfo > > Hi, > > > On 21/02/25 22:07, Phil Wyett wrote: > > > Control: tags -1 +moreinfo > > > > > > [...] > > > > I used to find value in your reviews, but i'm doubtful with this one... > > The package pass all your tests but you conclude that it > > "is not yet ready". > > > > What is wrong with the package ? > > Is it a missing "yes" to your question "Will this package be imported > > into Salsa?" that triggers the "red flag" ? > > > > I have the feeling that Phil runs some kind of automated test suites, > but does not really have a technical closer look at the source package. > E.g. the licenserecon checks if the license statements are consistent, > but it does not check if the license of packages are DFSG conformal > (maybe I'm missing something here). So his test suite is definitely a > very good first step, but not sufficient to determine if a package can > be pushed to the archive. > > IMHO his test suite should be built into mentors, so every package, > which is uploaded to mentors should be checked automatically. No, I > don't volunteer to implement this. > > H. > -- > Testmail >
Sebastien, A 'moreinfo' tag is simply that. I asked if you could make an addition and if you were going to import to Salsa. A DD can pick-up a package at any point, deem it ready for upload and do that upload. Additionally to doing the first reviews, I also keep an eye on what DD subsequently request and learn from this. A request to add 'debian/upstream/metadata' is not uncommon, see link below. https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2025/01/msg00093.html Hilmar, I personally run each test manually and have the package open in vscode to do more hands on first checking. This may or may not miss things, but I saw these tests as a good basis for getting packages up to a certain standard and avoid wasting DD time. These tests could possibly be added to the checks done at upload to mentors
