Re: scikit-learn testing migration
Hi Nilesh,
Am Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 02:13:05PM +0530 schrieb Nilesh Patra:
>
> Considering long term maintainance this does not seem to be nice especially
> keeping in mind the fact that sklearn is a key package.
For sure it is not nice.
> I think it is OK to do it _for the moment_ to allow the dust to settle a bit,
> and rm'ed packages to get to their destination once again
> but I'd suggest ``incrementally'' enabling the tests once everything is in place.
I've left the old code that switches of single test for specific architetures and
it can be enabled by simply setting the ERROR_LOG variable.
> I agree that upstream is probably not very enthusiastic about fixing those, but
> if we get fixes, we should keep propagating them.
Definitely. But with the old rules file we did not got the full information
what needs fixing.
> In a nutshell, IMO the sklearn revision that enters bookworm _should_ have tests enabled, without
> hacks and the tests that do not pass can be disabled (after all, it does not come from our end)
I'm perfectly fine with this.
> > I do not plan to close bugs #1003165 and #1008369 but I think it is
> > appropriate to reduce its severity to important and thus enable the
> > package and its dependencies to migrate to testing (I have not checked
> > debci yet).
>
> Sounds good, and thanks for caring for it.
You are welcome (despite I would love if someone would take over active
maintenance as Maintainer.
Kind regards
Andreas.
> > [1] https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/scikit-learn/-/blob/master/debian/rules#L227
>
>
> --
> Best,
> Nilesh
>
>
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: