Re: Suggesting change in DPT policy
On 2024-03-03 17:32, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 3/3/24 00:37, Christian Kastner wrote:
>> For
>> example, I also often skip tests -- it's just that I do it under
>> conditions that I'm happy to defend (cause isolated, reported upstream,
>> etc.), but others may not be aware of that.
>
> There are many cases where skipping tests is ok. As you wrote, when
> reported upstream, and when the thing that's broken is the test itself
> (but the functionality is not broken).
>
> The best practice is to document somewhere in the package (in d/rules?)
> why it's been disabled. I have to admit I often don't do that extra
> documentation work myself though (though mostly on packages I maintain
> alone, for OpenStack for example).
I agree and have no issue with this. On the contrary, I consider this
proper. I do it myself all the time. I've also temporarily disabled doc
builds (for some transition). But I make note of these things in d/rules
(or wherever it makes sense), and/or file bugs, etc.
In the case I'm talking about, this was more of just disabling large
parts (or maybe it was all, I don't remember) of tests with no attempt
at even looking what the problem was.
I should have framed my complaints better. I don't have any issue at all
with workarounds or pragmatism when they're implemented somewhat
carefully and/or reasonably, like the test-skip-handling you describe above.
Best,
Christian
Reply to: