Dmitry wrote: > post-build tests attempt to access internet which is relatively > harmless in this context.
I guess our differences on this issue are three-fold: Firstly, network access is not harmless in that it, at the very least, it leaks the privacy of the developer building something failing some variation of the DFSG "dissident" test. (Furthermore, network access can naturally lead to vulnerabilities, although I'm not claiming that any of the CC'd packages are doing so, am speaking only to the principle.) Secondly, retaining such tests provide little value as checks of the correct functioning of the package given that the package does not FTBFS if network access is restricted entirely. In this sense, they engender a false sense of security about the correct working of the package which is, again, not harmless from a quality assurance point of view. Lastly, they aren't really "post-build" as you suggest - they are surely an integral part of build. I really don't like to be a stickler for quoting Policy (and using that as a blunt and inflexible instrument of change/agenda), but I guess that redefining tests as "post-build" does have the sneaky advantage in that they aren't simple obvious violations of the paragraph in question. :) Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk `- _______________________________________________ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers