| 1 |
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 8:14 PM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 09/30/2013 12:54 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Am Sonntag, 29. September 2013, 23:41:03 schrieb hasufell: |
| 4 |
>>> It seems this happens more frequently these days, so I'd like to |
| 5 |
>>> remind people to check stable reverse deps before stabilizing a |
| 6 |
>>> library, especially when this is a non-maintainer stablereq. |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> Arch teams do not test them, so this is the business of the |
| 9 |
>>> maintainer or the dev who requested stabilization. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> Arch testing includes testing of reverse deps. If that's not the |
| 12 |
>> case, arch teams are not doing their job. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> I'd have to search the irc logs, but afair I was told so by ago. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> CCing him if I am wrong. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
If you aren't wrong, that might be why Ago is about the only one |
| 20 |
stabilizing libraries... :) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
It probably makes sense for arch teams to test a few reverse |
| 23 |
dependencies as the FAQ suggests. If we want them all tested, then it |
| 24 |
would make a lot more sense to have a tinderbox or other automated |
| 25 |
testing tools of some sort. Even then, we won't get much more than |
| 26 |
compile testing, or whatever test suites the packages happen to come |
| 27 |
with. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I haven't really seen any sign of widespread breakage though. I'm |
| 30 |
sure some issues slip through, but short of having automated testing I |
| 31 |
doubt we'll ever do better than that. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Rich |
Archives