1 |
Hi, |
2 |
|
3 |
On Sun, 25 Dec 2016 13:41:29 +0100 Agostino Sarubbo wrote: |
4 |
> Runtime testing required (which is not mandatory) needs to be filled in the |
5 |
> following way: |
6 |
> - Yes, you are asking to run a package after have compiled/installed it. |
7 |
> - No, you don't need runtime testing (e.g. packages that install only some |
8 |
> files). |
9 |
|
10 |
What is a recommended way to describe how runtime testing should be |
11 |
done? Some packages are quite complex and it is desired not only to |
12 |
run them, but to run with some args or do some actions. |
13 |
|
14 |
Some ideas: |
15 |
|
16 |
- copying description from one stablereq to another doesn't seem |
17 |
very practical to me; |
18 |
- adding comment inside ebuild is possible, but likely be missed |
19 |
during testing, especially for large ebuilds; also it looks like |
20 |
somewhat misused of ebuild; |
21 |
- maybe add new metadata tag like: |
22 |
<testing> |
23 |
Description how to test this package... |
24 |
</testing> |
25 |
? |
26 |
|
27 |
Another question: do we steel need to set STABLEREQ keyword for |
28 |
stabilization bugs? Since we now have a dedicated Stabilization |
29 |
component, STABLEREQ looks redundant. |
30 |
|
31 |
And thank you all for an awesome change :) |
32 |
|
33 |
Best regards, |
34 |
Andrew Savchenko |