On Sun, 2023-03-26 at 22:37 +0000, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > So you're implying that we are now responsible to fix the tests of > every > package in our dependency tree, and you'll just remove all dependent > packages if we don't do that.
My answer would be yes, especially for packages maintained by a project team and in an interpreted language. We have no compiler or other checks to fall back on other than tests. Obviously a dedicated maintainer who is using a package could determine if a package is compatible (at least for their use case) in other ways, but in this case the only other maintainer is also a project team. > And if that's the case why didn't graaff mask dev-util/aruba:0 in > addition to hiera-eyaml & hiera-eyaml-gpg? Simply because I did not get to that yet and leaf dependencies have to go first. > The fix for Aruba:0 is just tweaking the cucumber tag syntax: > "~@foo" -> "not @foo" This comment prompted me to have another look at aruba-0.6.2 because I was sure there was more work involved when I looked at this in the past, but you are right and it turns out that the dependency on rspec:2 was (no longer) correct. I have now updated the aruba-0.6.2 ebuilds and consequently unmasked hiera-eyaml again. > I'll do the better fix anyway, making hiera-eyaml use aruba:2 > instead, I > really just want better communication that we're now responsible for > the > entire deptree's tests. Using aruba:2 would be helpful here but I already looked at that a bit and the change was not trivial. It would still be the better fix. Kind regards, Hans
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
