1 |
W dniu sob, 06.01.2018 o godzinie 12∶10 +0100, użytkownik Michał Górny |
2 |
napisał: |
3 |
> So I'm thinking of an alternate idea: to start adding staging warnings |
4 |
> for additional profile class, combined with arch restriction. In other |
5 |
> words, change CI from: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> -p stable |
8 |
> |
9 |
> to: |
10 |
> |
11 |
> -p stable,something -a alpha,amd64,...,mips,... |
12 |
> |
13 |
> with a separate class for NonSolvableDeps in non-stable profiles (like |
14 |
> repoman's badindev/badinexp) that triggers only a staging-class warning. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> However, this means that: |
17 |
> |
18 |
> ১. We need to settle for either dev or exp being 'more' supported, |
19 |
> and drop all unsupported profiles to the other group. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> ২. We need to fix the appropriate class of profiles for stable arches |
22 |
> (or move them to the other group). |
23 |
> |
24 |
> ৩. The arches in question still need to generate reasonably low number |
25 |
> of warnings. |
26 |
> |
27 |
|
28 |
I'd like to follow this with a more precise proposal. Namely, redefine |
29 |
the current profile statuses to apply the following: |
30 |
|
31 |
a. stable -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages are errors, |
32 |
|
33 |
b. exp -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages are warnings, |
34 |
|
35 |
c. dev -> developer's playground, not tested. |
36 |
|
37 |
|
38 |
This would specifically mean that: |
39 |
|
40 |
1. Any 'exp' profiles with serious breakage will temporarily be |
41 |
downgraded to 'dev'. |
42 |
|
43 |
2. A 'dev' profile can be upgraded to 'exp' if its scale of depgraph |
44 |
breakage is reasonable (i.e. doesn't clutter the QA report with too many |
45 |
warnings). |
46 |
|
47 |
3. A 'exp' profile can be upgraded to 'stable' only if it has no |
48 |
depgraph breakages. |
49 |
|
50 |
I don't have a strong opinion on whether we should pursue marking all |
51 |
profiles 'stable', or if we support keeping 'exp' indefinitely. |
52 |
|
53 |
|
54 |
The CI would be updated to test 'exp' profiles and report staging |
55 |
warnings appropriately. Repoman would be updated to have warning-class |
56 |
dependency.badinexp (like it has for .badindev right now) and to check |
57 |
exp profiles by default. |
58 |
|
59 |
Your thoughts? |
60 |
|
61 |
-- |
62 |
Best regards, |
63 |
Michał Górny |