-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 12/06/2015 06:36 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> As you have seen multiple times, I'm running a minimalistic CI
> service for Gentoo that checks the repository for major issues
> using pkgcheck. So far it's automation is limited to sending a mail
> to dedicated [email protected] mailing list
> on breakage changes. From there, I compare the results to recent
> git log and mail the developers at fault, pointing out the bad
> commit.
> 
> A few developers have already subscribed to the mailing list to
> check if they haven't caused any new breakages and fix them
> quickly. For others, it's pretty much just me caring to check,
> which also means that when I'm not around things are left broken.
> 
> Automating the blaming process has been suggested multiple times 
> already but I so far considered it not worth the effort. Mostly
> because many of the issues are indirect, and trying to
> automatically figure them out from combination of the pkgcheck
> report and recent commits would be hard, and could cause false
> positives. For example, some of the depgraph breakages happen
> because of package.mask changes -- figuring that out automatically
> wouldn't be easy, and the script could blame an irrelevant commit
> in the package.
> 
> However, it was suggested recently that I could make it mail the
> maintainers of the affected packages. Even though most often it's 
> not them who are at fault, it was suggested that they'd prefer to
> know that their packages are broken.
> 
> So what do you think? Would it be fine to mail the package
> maintainers whenever their packages break? Would it be a problem if
> I just CC-ed all the maintainers on the gentoo-automated-testing
> mails? Please note that the breakages are catched per-package, and
> the script wouldn't be able to respect restrict="" or hand-written
> maintainer descriptions ;-).
> 

Sounds fine to me. It's annoying when I come across something that
breaks my deptree, and I don't want my packages to break things,
either. No complaints here, as long as it's clear what the screw-up is.

- -- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=PbDc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to