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 |