Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Thomas Goirand Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: managing transitions (was: python-networkx_1.10-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into experimental) Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 09:50:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Tue Oct 6 07:46:04 2015 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.7 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate:hard: -5 Organization: Debian User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/12808 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/56137C24.8040204@debian.org Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 46 Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 09:45:40 +0200 X-Original-Message-ID: <56137C24.8040204@debian.org> X-Original-References: <20150929094816.69da6b32@limelight.wooz.org> <560BA2F3.2080407@debian.org> <561228AC.3090103@debian.org> <5612724E.9060007@debian.org> <20151005171126.783f9e4a@limelight.wooz.org> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:7497 On 10/05/2015 11:11 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Oct 05, 2015, at 02:51 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: >=20 >> In other distributions (Red Hat and Ubuntu), everyone is aware of this >> kind of issue before uploading, and this kinds of things don't happen. >=20 > Ubuntu at least does have a technical solution that helps ameliorate > archive-wide breakages, and that is -proposed migration. When you uplo= ad > e.g. to wily, it gets diverted to wily-proposed and to get promoted it = has to > pass a number of tests. The package and their reverses have to build. = DEP-8 > tests have to pass, etc. You can get a nice report about which -propos= ed > promotions are failing: >=20 > http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_e= xcuses.html Oh, nice! We do need something like this too. > The downside is that you should probably be proactively checking this l= ist > (poll vs ping) and it can sometimes be difficult to figure out why a pr= omotion > fails or how to fix it. It's a super nice tool, though in some cases, I do see that we may want to ignore it. For example, dozens of packages passing, and just a single leaf one with some issues. > But this does mean that the archive itself is very rarely broken, and i= t can > be a convenient way to stage package updates that may have effects in p= arts of > the archive you might not be aware of. If we need the compute power to do it, I have a few proposal for that. I'm all for having a CI / CD also for packages. This IMO is the same topic as having a Gerrit review system (and not just Git) which could do tests on each change of a package even before having them committed to our git. Thomas