On Sun, 2021-09-12 at 23:27 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > I don't think it makes sense for the new superficial-tests to be considered > worse (= higher severity) than the old testsuite-autopkgtest-missing. I was initially thinking of cases were the package is perfectly possible to test properly but the maintainer just added a foo -v superficial test instead of adding a real test. I hadn't considered packages that aren't possible to test, for those I guess I assumed maintainers would just not add any tests. If the amount of packages with superficial tests that aren't possible to properly test is higher than the amount of packages that are possible to properly test, then your reasoning makes sense and the severities should be changed. From the examples you presented, I think that is correct so I agree the severities should be changed indeed. I do feel however that the value of superficial tests is usually quite minimal and so I would suggest to use the same severity for zero tests as for only superficial tests. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part