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

Re: Auto reject if autopkgtest of reverse dependencies fail or cause FTBFS

On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 at 18:22:53 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Maybe an intermediate position would be to respond to a CI failure by:
>  * Increasing the migration delay for the affecting package
>  * Notifying the affected package maintainers

I think this makes sense: it gives the maintainer and other interested
developers some time to assess whether the failure is a showstopper
(=> upload a fix/revert/workaround, or at worst file a RC bug) or not.

Or, conversely, blocking migrations but letting the relevant maintainers
remove that block might work.

On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 at 13:54:26 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Probably the simplest way to avoid problems with systems like this is to 
> remove any autopkg tests your packages are shipping.
> P.S. Perverse incentives FTW.

This is my concern too. If you maintain a useful package with tests that
are unstable but do not imply a release-critical issue, running those
tests and recording-but-ignoring the failures seems considerably better
for Debian than either disabling the tests or removing the software
(more information is better than less information, and if the package
is useful despite the test failure then it's better to have it than not).

Possible autopkgtest extension: "Restrictions: unreliable"?


Reply to: