Hi Nilesh,
Am Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 02:13:05PM +0530 schrieb Nilesh Patra:
>
> Considering long term maintainance this does not seem to be nice especially
> keeping in mind the fact that sklearn is a key package.
For sure it is not nice.
> I think it is OK to do it _for the moment_ to allow the dust to settle a bit,
> and rm'ed packages to get to their destination once again
> but I'd suggest ``incrementally'' enabling the tests once everything is in
> place.
I've left the old code that switches of single test for specific architetures
and
it can be enabled by simply setting the ERROR_LOG variable.
> I agree that upstream is probably not very enthusiastic about fixing those,
> but
> if we get fixes, we should keep propagating them.
Definitely. But with the old rules file we did not got the full information
what needs fixing.
> In a nutshell, IMO the sklearn revision that enters bookworm _should_ have
> tests enabled, without
> hacks and the tests that do not pass can be disabled (after all, it does not
> come from our end)
I'm perfectly fine with this.
> > I do not plan to close bugs #1003165 and #1008369 but I think it is
> > appropriate to reduce its severity to important and thus enable the
> > package and its dependencies to migrate to testing (I have not checked
> > debci yet).
>
> Sounds good, and thanks for caring for it.
You are welcome (despite I would love if someone would take over active
maintenance as Maintainer.
Kind regards
Andreas.
> > [1]
> > https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/scikit-learn/-/blob/master/debian/rules#L227
>
>
> --
> Best,
> Nilesh
>
>
--
http://fam-tille.de
