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

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

Hello all,

(I'm not subscribed, thus hand-crafting In-Reply-To:; please keep CC'ing me on

Ole Streicher [Fri, 13 Jan 2017 15:57:09 +0100]
> Will there be a way to override this for the maintainer? Otherwise I
> would see the danger that a buggy reverse dependency CI test can prevent
> an important update, for example if the reverse dependency uses a long
> deprecated function that is now removed.

If you upload a new version of a library that removes a symbol, then all
reverse dependences must get fixed in or removed from testing anyway. In this
scenario the new lib would already not propagate as the rdepends would FTBFS in
the binNMU against the new library SONAME (assuming that you did bump it).
OTOH, if you did not bump the SONAME, then this is an RC bug anyway which then
gets caught by the test.

For other scenarios which aren't already caught by britney's installability
checks (change in behaviour which doesn't reflect in changed ABI) we actually
do want the same: If we can catch a regression through a test, then it makes
zero sense to automatically land that regression in testing anyway -- the whole
point of this exercise is to allow us to land transitions with confidence and
sort out transitions in unstable *before* landing regressions in testing.


Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)

Reply to: