[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Thoughts on Debian quality, including automated testing

I fully support your campaign Lars. I've ever been willing to write
automatic tests for a lot of packages of mine. And even a large subset
of them (all OCaml related ones for example) can benefit of the very
same test applied to them. I never added the test simply because there
is no infrastructure for doing it and I'm thus stick to: build the
package -> dpkg -i it -> manually run the test. Surely an error-prone
practice.  I would really like to have a standardized way to do tests.

Thanks for your study on this!

>     Let's take quality assurance seriously
>     ======================================
>     * Reporting serious problems found by lintian/linda as bugs
>       against packages.

Still, I think we should start from simple objectives which can be
easily achieved. The one above qualifies in this set IMO.

I know a lot of lintian warnings/errors about packages of mine are
sitting on lintian.debian.org unaddressed. Had them been reported on the
BTS, I know I would have fixed them. It's stupid, I know, but I've ever
used the BTS to drive my Debian work and I believe a lot of other DDs
are working the same way. Adding a (semi-)automated mechanism for
reporting those warning/errors as bug report would improve packages

Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. -!-

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: