Hello DFSG team. I'd like to make a minor comment about this automated review.
On Sat, Nov 07, 2026 at 04:03:05PM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > - [minor] [packaging] node-gulp-mocha is marked <!nocheck> although > gulpfile.js requires it for the build, not only for the tests Build failures with the nocheck build profile are considered to be RC by the Release Managers, and this is included in the Release Policy for forky, so I would assign this a higher severity than "minor". Not sure how many intermediate levels are there between "minor" and "blocking". If the automated system actually tries to build the package with nocheck build profile and it fails, or if you estimate that the failure will happen with very high confidence, I think it would be ok to use "blocking" here. Note: I make archive rebuilds from time to time with nocheck build profile, and report what I find here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/[email protected];tag=ftbfs-nocheck-profile so if we can avoid adding new packages early to the "set of affected packages", the better. Thanks. -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
