On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 03:35:54PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Hi, > > Really nice work :-) > > Regarding the list format, you got it right. You don't need to add a > fake build time: when needed, I'll change mergeresults.rb so that it > works even with a different number of fields (I wanted to do that for > piuparts results anyway). > > Don't hesitate to ping me when you need it.
For me it is just fine: I like 42 seconds as build time > > About running it periodically, I'm not sure that you need to run it so > often. The test is similar to piuparts, and piuparts results tend to be > quite stable. The best thing to do would probably be to integrate that > into piuparts, so archive-wide piuparts runs would include your test as > well. indeed, when the next piuparts run is scheduled anyway? It might help to file/discuss bugs as the recent update-inetd "breakage" (see d-d at [0]) I'll bug piuparts list about this feature. thanks, filippo [0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/07/msg01013.html -- Filippo Giunchedi - http://esaurito.net PGP key: 0x6B79D401 random quote follows: To be learned in an art&C, the Theory is sufficient; to be a master of it, both the Theory and practice are requisite. -- Charles Hutton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
