Re: piuparts PTS integration

[Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>]

On Tue, Mar 17, 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> First, real piuparts failures are usually real RC bugs. If they are only
> reported to the PTS, they won't be properly tracked by the release team,
> for example. Are you planning to actively report bugs on piuparts
> failures in addition to reporting them to the PTS? Have you reported
> bugs on the piuparts failures you found so far?

 This is comparable to build failures; buildd logs are linked from the
 PTS.

> Second, since piuparts failures are real bugs, they should be "pushed"
> to the maintainer. I don't think that adding them to the PTS web page is
> a "pushy-enough" way to provide that information to maintainers.
> Instead, the PTS mail interface could be a nice way to inform the
> maintainer of failures.
> 
> Third, in my experience, piuparts generates a lot of false positives,
> that are either:
> - minor bugs (like corner-cases related to symlinks)
> - bugs in other packages (packages failing because one of their
>   dependencies is failing)
> Before information is provided automatically to maintainers, I would
> like to see numbers about percentage of false positives. Is piuparts
> really ready for that?

 I think the false positive problem is a good reason to avoid sending
 emails and a good reason to link the logs from the PTS to allow
 maintainers to read them if they like to.

-- 
Loïc Minier