Re: Your extremely welcome contributions to QA page (Was: FreedomBox tasks and metapackage)
Hi Sunil,
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 11:35:55AM -0700, Sunil Mohan Adapa wrote:
> > I just merged your extremely welcome changes[1] to the QA pages. This
> > was exactly the kind of contribution I was waiting for years! I'm
> > really happy that someone who has obviously more Python coding skills
> > into my hackish code! ;-)
>
> Thanks for your kind words.
Just the truth. ;-)
> > I also fully subscribe your suggestions for future improvements[1].
> > In addition I see two issues content-wise inside the QA pages:
> >
> > 1. I want to add some information about "package is not in testing".
> > This information is not yet queried in the SQL query but it should
> > be relatively easy to get when checking the UDD dashboard code.
>
> I will dig UDD code and try to add that information. I will write back
> if I need help understanding what needs to be shown.
I think I have read somewhere about the source of
https://udd.debian.org/dmd.cgi
which also contains "testing migration" information. It should not be to
hard to code this yourself but I learned that there is a pitfall for every
query. So re-using existing code is sensible.
> > 2. There are some issues displayed on the med-bio task[2] for instance
> > for packages augur and barrnap. UDD returns "Erroneous package"
> > which turns finally out that some dependencies are not available
> > on all architectures that are tested. As far as I know we can not
> > do much about it (to be clarified with CI team). I think it would
> > be helpful to suppress things we can not do anything about.
>
> I believe tests have three states: success or failure when the tests run
> fully and error when tests could not run fully due to problems with
> testing code. I believe 'Erroneous package' corresponds to the later
> case. I will confirm that this is the case and submit changes accordingly.
Sound sensible - but I wonder whether there are cases where some work
from packagers side is left.
> > Just let me know if I could be of more help.
>
> I have not continued much on this but will soon do so.
Just take your time.
> Meanwhile, will
> it be okay to merge websentinal changes for FreedomBox without the
> metapackage entering unstable?
The websentinel works perfectly without any metapackage (may be the
text on the html page talks about metapackages that do not exist - but
well, that's a thing we can ignore for some time).
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: