On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 02:32:16PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > Am Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 06:57:30AM -0300 schrieb Antonio Terceiro: > > > So I have hit that retention period yesterday by chance? Do you know > > > a better way to re-trigger the creation of the logs than uploading a > > > new package? > > > > Well you tried it exactly 60 days after the log was created. :) > > Beaten by Murphy, I guess. > > > You can click the retry (recycling icon) links, or go to the test > > history page for that package/suite/architecture, and try a newer log, > > or request a new test via the self-service interface. > > Where can I finde those links to click? The new not found page will contain all necessary links. For this case, you can start at https://ci.debian.net/packages/r/r-bioc-megadepth/unstable/s390x/ > > > No matter how long that period might be, IMHO the link in tracker > > > should not point to something saying > > > > > > Not Found: /data/autopkgtest/testing/s390x/r/r-bioc-megadepth/36684073/log.gz > > > > > > I'd recommend to rather replace it by > > > > > > Sorry, to limit the space consumtion on our servers the log for > > > $PACKAGE $VERSION was deleted on $DATE. > > > > > > Extra points if you could add a method how to recreate this log. > > > > > > Its probably a common thing to point to those logs in Github issues and > > > its not helpful if the page just looks like an error message. > > > > Yes, you are right. I now have pending changes to debci to do just that. > > Great! > > Another idea: Removing data according to time span is one thing. > Another thing is possibly to leave the log of "the latest version in > unstable" since this is linked from tracker no matter how old the log > might be. I'm not sure whether I'm naive and whether this might be > possible / sensible. That is also a good idea, I will try to implement that as well.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature