implicit debian/tests/control files
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 08:22:09AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 07:22:46AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > Niko Tyni [2014-09-11 22:55 +0300]:
> > > > Admittedly these dynamically generated control files are a bit against
> > > > the spirit of DEP-8 to have an explicit test control. However, I think
> > > > it's not too bad as the benefit of not having to change 3.000 source
> > > > packages all the time is just immense. The one thing I'd like to add
> > > > to the source packages is an "XS-Testsuite: autopkgtest" field though,
> > > > so that we can stop maintaining hardcoded whitelists at some point
> > > > (but from my POV it's ok if that takes several years even).
> > >
> > > While I certainly agree about the benefits, I'm worried about other
> > > consumers of debian/tests/control, which would have to reimplement the
> > > implicit control files. There's at least sadt(1) in devscripts that I
> > > know of.
> > Ah, right. From my side I'd certainly like to make this as practical
> > and useful to *you* as the consumers of this. But yeah, sometimes I
> > keep forgetting that adt-run isn't the only implementation of this.
> We could extract this logic into a dependency package that both
> autopkgtest and sadt could use, as well as any other implementation that
> comes up.
Antonio Terceiro <terceiro at debian.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature