Hi Paul!
Hi Lisandro,
On 07-07-2019 16:16, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
>> All autopkgtest failures considered RC for bullseye
>> ===================================================
>>
>> From now on, all autopkgtest failures will be considered release-critical for
>> bullseye. So if your package has failing autopkgtests, now is a good time to
>> start looking for a fix
>
> Now this raises some questions for me. Now I maintain a (huge) library
> (hello Qt!). I do an unstable upload and package A starts failing it's
> autopkgtests. In this case:
>
> - How does this failure affects the uploaded library (imagine we have
> a transition, as it will always be Qt's case due to private headers).
By default, the migration to testing will be blocked, exactly like we
have been doing the last half year.
> - What's expected from the maintainers of the library?
It is expected that you communicate (e.g. via a bug report filed against
both packages like I have been doing for over a year now, see examples
on [1]) with the maintainers of the package to see why the test starts
failing. Together, you should be able to work out which package needs to
adapt. Either the autopkgtest found a real issue in your library which
you need to fix, or the package needs to adapt to the new status of your
library, either by fixing the package itself, or its autopkgtest. The
migration of your library will be stalled to give the package time to be
adapted. Of course that needs to happen within a reasonable amount of
time, so if it takes to long, or you and the maintainers of the package
can't agree on who should adapt what, contact the release team.
Just to be clear, in case you got confused by it, if the package
*already* fails in testing, it isn't a concern for packages that just
trigger that autopkgtest, only for the package with the failing autopkgtest.
I wonder if you were thinking of something else? If so, please elaborate.
First of all thanks for replying and sorry for not doing so sooner, I clearly missed it.
No, what I have been perceiving (and pretty please note that this is my personal "feeling") is that maintainers, specially library maintainers, have even more and more "stuff to care for". Also please don't get me wrong, I do understand that this is indeed with the idea of improving Debian. But the amount of work needed to maintain the same stuff I have been working with this last years take more and more time, to the point that sometimes I feel it gets into pair with a payed job.
Once again please remember it's my personal point of view, and if something above doesn't seems quite right it might be my not so good English ;-)
Again, thanks a lot for replying.
Cheers, Lisandro.