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

Re: CI plan

Hi Tanya,

[I'm replying just to the list since I assume you and Canberk are reading it]

BTW, thanks for commenting on Canberks question to exonerate.

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 05:00:02PM +0300, merlettaia wrote:
> I saw tests on exonerate and came up with idea what should be tested.
> Is is ok if today I'll add several tests to concavity (the package I
> started to add tests for at starting period), to check results of work with
> other parameters and simple check of correctness of different types of
> output formats (as given in package's readme.txt),

Well, we have a simple test now.  I would have considered this as OK for
an upload if you would have confirmed.  If you think it is better to add
one or two tests more that's fine.  If you really want to add more
that's even better but the current test even now fullfills the criterion
of proving that the package works as expected - so feel free to confirm
that the tests are OK to your opinion and I'll upload the package.

> then try to do lintian
> checks and hardening for that package?

Well, I hope I did not spoiled your enthusiasm and just did

    cme fix dpkg-control

which solved half of the lintian messages and added

    export DEB_BUILD_MAINT_OPTIONS = hardening=+all

in debian/rules which dealt with the rest.  So these are simple things I
do not waste your bioinformatics knowledge on (but for sure you can do
this as well next time since you now have an example how to do this
> After that I can continue with conservation-code (because this package is
> related with concavity) and proceed at the order given in my original
> timeline plan. Is it ok?

Perfectly fine. :-)
> Please correct me if necessary, because I'm not too good at bash scripting
> (although I can read it).

Looking at your test script you seem to have the needed bash skills. ;-)

> It is not necessary to move repositories from svn to git - I think it would
> be faster to try to work on svn (git is just personal preference, because
> at my previous work I experienced some strange problems with svn - but I'm
> comfortable with svn).

OK.  I usually move packages from SVN to Git also for other reasons and
at request.  If you don't ask me explicitly I'll do nothing.

Kind regards



Reply to: