Re: Lagging behind several versions for snakemake - lots of failed tests in latest version

[Steffen Möller <steffen_moeller@gmx.de>]

On 17.10.21 21:19, Nilesh Patra wrote:

> On
>       10/18/21 12:13 AM, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote:
>       
> > On 15/10/2021 14:46, Andreas Tille wrote:
> >         
> > > Hi Rebecca
> > >           
> > >           
> > >           and whoever might care.  As usual snakemake is troublesome to
> > >           upgrade.
> > >           
> > >           I have injected the latest version into Git but there are lots
> > >           of
> > >           
> > >           failed tests.  It would be great if someone could care about
> > >           this.
> > >           
> > >         
> >         I hadn't tried to upgrade snakemake because python-pulp is too
> >         old (#963041).
> >         
> >       
>       
>       Yeah, snakemake has now moved to pulp 2.0. pulp had another
>       rev-dep on congress which is now removed from archive.
>       
>       pulp is maintained in openstack, and I sent out an email to zigo
>       and openstack-list asking to upgrade,
>       
>       
>       cf:
>       https://lists.debian.org/debian-openstack/2021/10/msg00001.html
>       
>

I had been there and already got a reply from zigo (June this year) that we can go ahead with an update since pulp is (no longer?) used with Open Stack. I never got around to it, though. I Just paste our exchange below (don't expect anyone to mind).

On 6/8/21 1:40 PM, Steffen Möller wrote:

Hi Thomas,

Am 07.06.2021 um 09:05 schrieb Thomas Goirand:

On 6/5/21 7:52 PM, Steffen Möller wrote:

Hello,

pulp is outdated. Would you mind updating it or having me update it?
There is no immediate reason for me to update that version, the error I
was looking for that made me check the version but then turned out to be
elsewhere.

Since I do not run OpenStack myself, I cannot test the effect of such a
version bump and would hence prefer the OpenStack team to address this
or to guide me towards it.

Cheers,
Steffen

Hi,

I don't think anything from OpenStack uses python-pulp, so feel free to
take over the package if you care for it.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand

Ah, nice. That makes it easy. I had a first attempt last week and found
the branch structure of your current repository to be incompatible with
git-buildpackage (under my hands) and hence with tools like
routine-update. For Debian Med (and increasingly Debian Science)
routine-update is helping a lot, the automation also eases team
maintenance. Hence, if you do not mind, I would leave everything intact
for the OpenStack repository, copy'n'paste into a new repository that
Debian Science an.

Best,
Steffen

Hi,

FYI, the only thing you got to do is have this in your ~/.gbp.conf:

[DEFAULT]
builder = sbuild --source-only-changes
cleaner = /bin/true
ignore-branch = True
pristine-tar = False
no-create-orig = True
[buildpackage]
export-dir = ../build-area/

The important bit is the ignore-branch and pristine-tar. IMO, these
options should be by default in gbp, otherwise one has to maintain it in
all of the repositories, and for a large amount of packages, that's too
much (useless) work...

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

>       
> > The test failures look like this isn't the
> >         only problem, [...]
> >         
> >       
>       
>       ACK.
>       
>       Thanks a lot for your work!
>       
>

Yip! Many thanks also from my side.

Steffen