[Re-sending as the autopkgtest list on Alioth has ceased to exist. Sorry for the dup.] Hi Niels, On 15-04-18 12:50, Niels Thykier wrote: > Ok, a few remarks: > > > AutopkgtestPolicy.__init__: >> self.pending_tests_file = os.path.join(self.options.state_dir, 'pending.json') >> self.results_cache_file = os.path.join(self.options.state_dir, 'results.cache') > > The basenames ("pending.json" and "results.cache") are rather generic > and state_dir is reused between all policies. I think we should > namespace these files somehow (E.g. either put them in a subdir or name > them "autopkgtests-<original-name>"). I am not at all attached to the names. They come straight from the Ubuntu code, so I see no problem changing them. > AutopkgtestPolicy.apply_policy_impl: >> # Keep track if this source package has tests of its own for the >> # bounty system, but only if at least one arch has something else than >> # running or alwaysfail >> if testsrc == source_name and r - {'RUNNING', 'RUNNING-ALWAYSFAIL', 'ALWAYSFAIL'}: >> src_has_own_test = True > > How difficult would it be to make the bouncy only apply if the tests are > successful on all architectures (i.e. no "ALWAYSFAIL")? If it is a > trivial matter, then I would prefer to only give bonus to packages that > are a good example on all architectures. I'll think about it. I don't know by heart. I expect this to be no problem. Please be aware though that currently ci.debian.net only runs amd64. I don't know the details of what would be needed to add other architectures, but I expect that to be: hardware. ci.debian.net currently runs on Amazon EC2 instances, I think there is no other hardware available there. We had some arm flavor in the past, but I believe that couldn't keep up or the setup was buggy, or something. In principle this is no issue, and there have been hardware offers. They just haven't materialized. > AutopkgtestPolicy.tests_for_source: >> # Hardcode linux-meta → linux, lxc, glibc, systemd triggers until we get a more flexible >> # implementation: https://bugs.debian.org/779559 >> if src.startswith('linux-meta'): >> for pkg in ['lxc', 'lxd', 'glibc', src.replace('linux-meta', 'linux'), 'systemd', 'snapd']: >> if pkg not in reported_pkgs: >> # does this have any image on this arch? >> for pkg_id in srcinfo.binaries: >> if pkg_id.architecture == arch and '-image' in pkg_id.package_name: >> try: >> tests.append((pkg, self.britney.sources['unstable'][pkg].version)) >> except KeyError: >> try: >> tests.append((pkg, sources_info[pkg].version)) >> except KeyError: >> # package not in that series? *shrug*, then not >> pass >> break > > Is this piece still relevant? AFAICT, #779559 is fixed in stable. (I > admit having a feeling of deja vu about this - apologies if I asked > about this case earlier and simply forgot the answer). Coincidentally, I investigated last night and removed the code already locally. Debian doesn't even have a linux-meta package, that is something Ubuntu specific. In my opinion, the Ubuntu linux-meta package should just start do the right thing now. > Beyond that: I also committed some changes for some nits things I > discovered while reviewing the code. Ack. And thanks for those. I am not fluent yet in Python to catch any of these issues. >> Secondly, assuming we can come to deployment of the new britney policy, >> I started a gobby document³ to draft an announcement to d-d-a. [...] > My "quick" fix would be removing the emphasis and inject a bit longer > explanation: > """ > There is one important note to make here on how to go about regressions > in test cases from reverse dependencies. We recommend communication > between the maintainers of the involved packages as one party has > insight in what changed and the other party insight in what is being > tested. More information is available in the britney documentation > [britney]. > """ Ack, will take over. > On another note: Would you be open for getting hint permissions for > dealing with autopkgtest policy issues (at least in the initial phase of > the deployment)? I recon you already know the answer: yes. I have an additional note. There is one commit to debci pending review and deployment that I like to get landed before going live with the official britney checking autopkgtest: the retrigger link currently only works with a POST http request with a special debci key; the commit will add a functional GET request option and optionally works with Debian SSO certificates. Apart from that, my experience over the last week is very positive. Just for reference, I started collecting relevant bugs in the bts with the ci-team@tracker.debian.org user¹ in the bts (bunk and ginggs added a couple using the right usertags as well). Paul ¹ https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=ci-team@tracker.debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature