On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 10:41:34PM +0200, Cédric Boutillier wrote: > Dear Ruby team, > > I started to investigate the impact of the upload of ruby-rspec 3.x to > unstable. I found 210 reverse build-dependencies. Many of them made the > transition to rspec 3 (I counted so far 34 vs 17 needing a patch, still > investigating the others). > > I am collecting on gobby.debian.org, in Teams/RubyExtras/rspec3.txt the list > with annotations (patches, bugs, ...). > > I started also the following page on the wiki: > https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/RSpec3 > to collect tips and tricks to convert needed test suites from RSpec2 to > RSpec3. I wrote the obvious ones. > > I am proposing to upload to experimental all the new upstream versions > depending on rspec3 (may be just arch:any packages ?). Then file bugs, > possibly with a patch. > > Or should we be not that cautious, and not be afraid to break unstable, > and FTBFS about 100 packages? I intend to start the transition to ruby2.2 soon, and having too many arch:any packages FTBFS might be a problem. Do we know how many arch:any packages are broken wrt to rspec3? OTOH there is no reason to rush with removing ruby2.1, so maybe it's ok? > I started to use the rspec3 usertag, with the > debian-ruby@lists.debian.org user: > https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bts-usertags.cgi?tag=rspec3&user=debian-ruby%40lists.debian.org > > I am afraid that it will not be very easy in some cases. For example, > yard is stuck with RSpec 2.12. The patch I have is already 2000+ lines > long, and still ~50 spec failures :( In those extreme cases, I think it's acceptable to disable the test suite (or parts of it) in exchange for a few functional tests (with e.g. autopkgtest) that make sure the package still works -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature