Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #13833 > unrolled thread

sphinxext-opengraph new upstream version and tests

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  sphinxext-opengraph new upstream version and tests Chiara Marmo <marmochiaskl@gmail.com> - 2021-12-31 01:30 +0100
    Re: sphinxext-opengraph new upstream version and tests Jeroen Ploemen <jcfp@debian.org> - 2021-12-31 13:10 +0100
      Re: sphinxext-opengraph new upstream version and tests Chiara Marmo <marmochiaskl@gmail.com> - 2022-01-01 04:30 +0100
        Re: sphinxext-opengraph new upstream version and tests Jeroen Ploemen <jcfp@debian.org> - 2022-01-02 13:00 +0100
          Re: sphinxext-opengraph new upstream version and tests Chiara Marmo <marmochiaskl@gmail.com> - 2022-01-03 02:30 +0100
            Re: sphinxext-opengraph new upstream version and tests Jeroen Ploemen <jcfp@debian.org> - 2022-01-03 11:00 +0100
              sphinxext-opengraph new upstream version and tests Chiara Marmo <marmochiaskl@gmail.com> - 2022-01-03 20:20 +0100

#13833 — sphinxext-opengraph new upstream version and tests

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Dear list, Sandro,

I have uploaded on salsa a new upstream version of sphinxext-opengraph:
https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/sphinxext-opengraph/

I have also modified the way how tests are run... but I'm still in the
process of understanding how autopkgtests works ....

If everything is good feel free to upload. Let me know how things can be
improved otherwise.

Thanks for listening,

Chiara

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#13834

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 14:27:09 -1000
Chiara Marmo <marmochiaskl@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear list, Sandro,
> 
> I have uploaded on salsa a new upstream version of
> sphinxext-opengraph:
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/sphinxext-opengraph/
> 
> I have also modified the way how tests are run... but I'm still in
> the process of understanding how autopkgtests works ....

Enabling the CI on salsa for your package can be really helpful to
verify things work as expected. As an added benefit, it also lowers
the time and effort needed to review a package.

Anyway, the current autopkgtest has a number of obvious flaws:
* the binary package it's trying to test isn't actually installed at
  all because it's not listed as a test dependency;
* the same goes for the supported python versions the test loops over
  (i.e. the necessary dependency on python3-all is missing).
* on the other hand, dependencies of the package being tested (such
  as python3-sphinx) should not be duplicated as a test dependency;
* within the control file, the field identifying tests in a separate
  file is called 'Tests', not 'Test-Command'.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13837

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Thanks Jeroen for your time and your review

Enabling the CI on salsa for your package can be really helpful to
> verify things work as expected. As an added benefit, it also lowers
> the time and effort needed to review a package.
>

Indeed, I have enabled it.


> Anyway, the current autopkgtest has a number of obvious flaws:
> * the binary package it's trying to test isn't actually installed at
>   all because it's not listed as a test dependency;
> * the same goes for the supported python versions the test loops over
>   (i.e. the necessary dependency on python3-all is missing).
> * on the other hand, dependencies of the package being tested (such
>   as python3-sphinx) should not be duplicated as a test dependency;
> * within the control file, the field identifying tests in a separate
>   file is called 'Tests', not 'Test-Command'.
>

I think the configuration is better now, as the CI passed too.
Please let me know if the package is ready for the upload.

Also, happy new year 2022 to all the people on the list!

Best,

Chiara

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13843

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 17:25:34 -1000
Chiara Marmo <marmochiaskl@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think the configuration is better now, as the CI passed too.

Using @builddeps@ may seem attractive at first, but is best reserved
for autopkgtests that actually do a full build. In most other cases
redundant extra stuff gets installed that's only needed at build
time, such as dh-python and setuptools in this case.

In addition, python packages that run tests at build time typically
have the full set of module dependencies as build-deps that one also
expects to find as deps on the (main) binary pkg. For such packages,
using @builddeps@ causes dependencies of the package being tested to
get duplicated as test deps, meaning any missing ones - for example
resulting from a packaging or helper application bug - could easily
be overlooked. After all, the autopkgtest would pass even for a
severely broken binary package with all python deps missing.

> Please let me know if the package is ready for the upload.

The debhelper compat level could do with a bump to the current
version. Other than that, things look fine.

> Also, happy new year 2022 to all the people on the list!

Indeed!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13846

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Thanks Jeroen for your comments and clarifications.

Using @builddeps@ may seem attractive at first, but is best reserved
> for autopkgtests that actually do a full build. In most other cases
> redundant extra stuff gets installed that's only needed at build
> time, such as dh-python and setuptools in this case.
>

I believe I have reduced the dependencies to the ones needed for the tests.

The debhelper compat level could do with a bump to the current
> version. Other than that, things look fine.
>

Version bumped.

Ready for upload?
Thanks!
Best,

Chiara

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13849

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, 2 Jan 2022 15:26:30 -1000
Chiara Marmo <marmochiaskl@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ready for upload?

Uploaded with some minor changes. Thanks for your contribution.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13853

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

> Uploaded with some minor changes. Thanks for your contribution.
>

Thanks Jeroen!

Chiara

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web