On 2021-11-27 08 h 54, Stefano Rivera wrote: > Hi Sandro (2021.11.27_06:01:08_+0000) > >> Hello, >> while working on something else[1], i noticed how many of the >> repositories in the DPT salsa group are in poor shape: >> >> * missing branches >> * changes not pushed to salsa >> * general misalignment in configuration/setup/organization >> * many other small nuances >> >> [1] https://github.com/sandrotosi/debian-python-team-tracker > > +1 this is great!
\0/ I've been wanting something for QA like that for a while, but never had the time / energy to look into it further. All in all, it's too easy to forget to push something to Salsa and never realise it. >> please take the content with caution, as it's still an early, raw >> draft (i spot-checked some of the reported issues, but there could be >> bugs/issues) and it contains data that can be outdated (see below re >> caching); the fact that the report indicates only 43 repos are without >> violations is a bit disarming, but i think the tool tries to err on >> the side of verbosity and pedantry, with 2 level of violations (ERROR >> and WARNING) to mark which ones are the most important that require >> immediate attention vs the nice-to-have ones. > > When we did the migration to git, there weren't good tools for managing > the setup of the salsa repos (hooks, etc.) yet. I'd assume those exist > now, we should check in with what other teams are doing. That stuff can > all be fixed in one run of a tool, I'd assume. Could this become part of the Debian Janitor at some point? I could see teams adding a per-team config file to check things like what branch names should be expected, etc. and the Janitor fixing all this if it has commit access. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Louis-Philippe Véronneau ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ po...@debian.org / veronneau.org ⠈⠳⣄
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
