[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: management of debian/salsa-ci.yml (Was: Why is the team standard to use two-file includes for Salsa CI?)



On Thursday, August 21, 2025 1:19:29 PM Mountain Standard Time Lucas Nussbaum 
wrote:
> On 21/08/25 at 09:08 -0700, Soren Stoutner wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 21, 2025 4:58:20 AM Mountain Standard Time Lucas
> > Nussbaum
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > > In short, probably less than 100 packages with custom stuff, mostly
> > > > configuration variables, including some custom configuration that 
would
> > > > be worth re-checking.
> > > > 
> > > > It would be easy to preserve the custom stuff while implementing a
> > > > transition from the current includes to a team-specific one.
> > > 
> > > I tried the team-specific include in ruby-peach, and it works.
> > 
> > That’s good.  Do you have any plans for things it could do better for Ruby
> > packages than the default config?
> 
> We could enable the wrap_and_sort test (but we should first check how
> many packages that would break).
> 
> It would also be interesting to write a check that ensures that the
> tarball in the archive matches the one in the pristine-tar branch. I
> found and fixed quite a few packages where it was not the case.
> 
> To ease the work on transitioning to newer ruby versions, we could maybe
> add custom build and test job using ruby-defaults/experimental.

Those are good idea.  I will update all my Ruby packages to use this Salsa CI 
the next time I am doing an upload.

-- 
Soren Stoutner
soren@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: