-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Pabs, hi qa team.
Current development instance is here: (showing data from partials runs, so expect strange results, but the leftmost column is real), http://zidpc9027.tugraz.at/duck/index.php I added the checks for SVN repos, which now leads to ~2700 binary packages with issues. SVN checks are done via svn info, which seems to work quite well, e.g. http://zidpc9027.tugraz.at/duck/index.php?searchstring=pabs To link to a specific package(from PTS), you may now use the parameter package=<packagename> like this: http://zidpc9027.tugraz.at/duck/index.php?package=xtermset I am currently thinking about a way to check (amongst other vcs systems) git repos, without cloning the full repo - maybe just fetch some file from inside the repo? Someone has some idea how this might be done? Basically bandwith is no issue, but it seems a bit overkill to me, to _really_ check out git repos. And yes, i know i still have to work in the design. This is still work in development, so please be kind ;-) and please give me feedback. Simon Am 12/30/12 08:29, schrieb Paul Wise: > On Sun, 2012-12-30 at 07:41 +0100, Simon Kainz wrote: > >> just to let you know i am working on it: >> >> http://zidpc9027.tugraz.at/duck/index.php?format=plain >> >> now shows the list in plaintext format which is the way we discussed it >> some time ago. Please remember, this is development only. > > Excellent, please let me know when it is deployed. > >> Concerning VCS-* fields: Currently you show the "The upstream URL(s) >> for this package had some issues for the past 5 days. " string on the >> PTS. When I am now starting to add the VCS-* statii, do you think it's >> better to keep them separate, allowing another line like "VCS had some >> issues in the past .. days?" > > Hmm. Vcs-Browser fields are not for the upstream VCS, but the Debian > one. So I should remove "upstream" from that message. I think we should > just have one message for all URLs, makes it easier to have in the PTS. > >> Or should I just throw all data together and return just one good/bad >> state? But i think we should prefer the former way, as I will also try >> to incorporate Upstream metadata, so the whole thing might get too flaky >> for sane results. > > I prefer one good/bad status for all the URLs to keep the PTS simple. If > you want to also add more reports containing status for each URL, that > might be useful for things like UDD. > > I think we should discuss DUCK on the debian-qa list from now on, > instead of in private mail. Is that OK for you? Are you subscribed? > > You might want to consider not using PHP any more: > > http://me.veekun.com/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/ > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlDkSQAACgkQEtt57sR2O6XeXQCglzy3DMgQRQTQI/JbYAc3BRYo n/IAn0MM8S9LrmYQUWFxjuUzn3PLrNgC =jRUW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
