Hi David, On 17-09-2020 12:50, David Bremner wrote: > Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> writes: > OK, that's all very well, I understand the release team needs to do > things for its own needs. However > > 1) Such an autopkgtest would have prevented an actual RC (as in makes > the package unusable) bug in a recent upload of ledger Then, I think you are misunderstanding how it works. A failing superficial autopkgtest *will* block migration. It's just that you'll not get the reduced age for a passing one and during the upcoming bullseye release, your package will not be eligible for the migration during the hard freeze without a manual unblock by the release team. > 2) I'm now even less motivated to add autopkgtests. > > So, there can, and will be unintended consequences. Maybe that's an > acceptable tradeoff, I don't know. I think there's consequences. This one I did foresee, albeit I think, following my answer to 1, it's for the wrong reason. Paul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature