Re: Debian derivatives census: subscription system
Hi Anastasia,
Anastasia Tsikoza:
> As part of the Outreachy project we are going to implement a
> subscription system for error notifications produced by derivatives.
Great! Thanks for working on this :)
> If you are going to sign up for a subscription, please tell us, what
> error output you consider useful and whether you would like to receive
> the emails regularly or after some specific event (like if the new
> check-* file differs from the old).
I would happily subscribe to the Tails errors/warnings if:
- They bring enough information to be actionable (for example, I have
no idea what to do with "mismatched source packages in
Sources/Packages"; which are the faulty packages?). Fixing them all
now in not a prerequisite IMO, as long as someone is ready to fix
them incrementally when reported by subscribers once the
notifications are in place.
- The notifications are sent in a way such as I won't quickly and
unconsciously learn to ignore them all.
I would like to be notified when check results change. A basic
home-made implementation might be OK as a proof of concept but on
the long term, I am pretty sure it'll be insufficient: keeping the
signal/noise ratio high for monitoring checks is not a trivial
problem. Thankfully, we have good monitoring systems available with
the needed features to solve it, e.g. flapping detection and
notifying only after N successive failures. So I humbly suggest
plugging the checks into one such existing monitoring system
instead of writing a new one from scratch.
On top of that, I wouldn't mind a reminder sent 1-4 times a year
about the unchanged, still pending issues; but that's not necessary
if the whole thing is exposed to me via a monitoring system's
web dashboard.
An Lintian-like override mechanism and output ("here are the
non-overriden errors, oh and by the way you're also overriding
N other ones") would be nice but probably vastly overkill at
this stage.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
Reply to: