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,


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to