Re: [gentoo-scm] Overall Validation Approach

[Robin H. Johnson]

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:08:57AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Two items in this email - one is a quick status update, but I think
> the more important issue is stepping back to figure out why we're even
> doing this...
This is not a complete response, but a quick response to parts of the
email only.

> 3. File hashes don't match, because the migration changes the headers.
>  (medium effort)
This one should be mostly solved soon in the git output. The currently
published bundle has the wrong path in $Header$, but it'll be fixed in
the next push.

> 4. Authors don't match, because these are also transformed. (medium
> effort)
This one is an issue I think missing in the current Git.

> I'm open to suggestions, but rather than fully re-inventing the wheel
> I'm thinking that fixing issues #1 and #5 above might be as far as I
> go with this.  They're easy to fix, and #1 is resulting in huge gaps.
> What that will tell us is that nothing is getting missed in the
> migration.
Start w/ #1+#5, and evaluate in more depth after that. There was a
discussion at the miniconf regarding how much we should be sure it's
right. I was thinking more explicitly ensuring that the results and
commit ids are repeatable, and using human eyeballs to compare the
mismatches from your initial validation work.

I was hoping mainly that your validation code would exclude all the easy
simple matches, and leave the rest for us to do by eyeball.

> Code review of ferringb's work might be more productive in terms of
> spotting problems.  So might be publishing his bundles and letting
> people spot check their favorite packages.
His initial bundle is already live.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead
E-Mail     : robbat2@g.o
GnuPG FP   : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85