On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 19:53:13 -0300 Antonio Terceiro wrote: > Hi,
Hello Antonio! :-) > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 08:49:52PM +0100, Joe Mullally wrote: > > http://ci.debian.net and autopkgtest are awesome. > > > > Has anyone thought of writing something like apt-listbugs that checks > > package upgrades/new installs against the CI data recently? > > > > Seems like an obvious and easy win towards getting a safely upgradable > > "rolling release" debian version based on CI that has been discussed > > before. > > That is interesting, although the original idea was to do that checking > on the archive side i.e. preventing packages that fail their CI (or that > make reverse dependencies fail theirs) from migrating to testing. > > Such a client-side tool would however be useful anyway, at least for > people running unstable. apt-listbugs has some logic to pin buggy > packages if the users says so, and to remove the pinning when the > corresponding bugs get fixed; it would be nice to not duplicate that. > I'm CC:ing apt-listbugs maintainer(s?) for input. This is somewhat interesting, even though I would have to ask a few questions about ci.debian.org in order to assess the feasibility of the idea. But now I am in a hurry... :p First thing off the top of my head: what about implementing an automatic RC-bug-report filing mechanism in ci.debian.net? When a package is to be blamed for some CI test failure, ci.debian.net would automatically file a RC bug report against the package on the Debian BTS, with appropriate version info and content. This would prevent the package from migrating from unstable to testing and would make the test failure visible for apt-listbugs users, at the same time! What do you think about this possible strategy? -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ fsck is a four letter word... ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
pgpl5QWL3Dsl_.pgp
Description: PGP signature
