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

Re: Request for review/upload of recoverdm 0.20-6



Hello Aleksey,

Regarding the smoke tests you added, I think it would be better to declare them as "Restriciton: superficial"[0]:
superficial
    The test does not provide significant test coverage, so if it
    passes, that does not necessarily mean that the package under test
    is actually functional. If a ``superficial`` test fails, it will be
    treated like any other failing test, but if it succeeds, this is
    only a weak indication of success. Continuous integration systems
    should treat a package where all non-superficial tests are skipped as
    equivalent to a package where all tests are skipped.

    For example, a C library might have a superficial test that simply
    compiles, links and executes a "hello world" program against the
    library under test but does not attempt to make use of the library's
    functionality, while a Python or Perl library might have a
    superficial test that runs ``import foo`` or ``require Foo;`` but
    does not attempt to use the library beyond that.

The other changes looks fine for me, I will just have another final look at the patch you introduced before uploading. I mean, after you add the "superficial" tag to the test, unless you have any objections (feel free to point them if any).

Thanks for your work, and sorry for the short reply, I'm not having too much free time on these days.

[0]https://salsa.debian.org/ci-team/autopkgtest/raw/master/doc/README.package-tests.rst

--
Samuel Henrique <samueloph>

Reply to: