On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 08:22:09AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 07:22:46AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > > Niko Tyni [2014-09-11 22:55 +0300]: > > > > Admittedly these dynamically generated control files are a bit against > > > > the spirit of DEP-8 to have an explicit test control. However, I think > > > > it's not too bad as the benefit of not having to change 3.000 source > > > > packages all the time is just immense. The one thing I'd like to add > > > > to the source packages is an "XS-Testsuite: autopkgtest" field though, > > > > so that we can stop maintaining hardcoded whitelists at some point > > > > (but from my POV it's ok if that takes several years even). > > > > > > While I certainly agree about the benefits, I'm worried about other > > > consumers of debian/tests/control, which would have to reimplement the > > > implicit control files. There's at least sadt(1) in devscripts that I > > > know of. > > > > Ah, right. From my side I'd certainly like to make this as practical > > and useful to *you* as the consumers of this. But yeah, sometimes I > > keep forgetting that adt-run isn't the only implementation of this. > > We could extract this logic into a dependency package that both > autopkgtest and sadt could use, as well as any other implementation that > comes up. Sounded fun: http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/autodep8.git -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature