Bug#883218: RFS: elpy/1.20.0-1 [ITP]
Thread continues at Bug#898205: Acknowledgement (Consecutive builds may fail) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#883218: RFS: elpy/1.20.0-1 [ITP]
Hi Nicholas, > > Anyway, thank you for your kind comments. Do let me know if/when > > you have any updates to the package, particularly one that fixes the > > FTBFS twice-in-a-row. > > This was solved in #896998 "python-pip: missing required _vendor > module. Broken ${python:Depends}?". Hm? I think you misparsed - your package FTBFS when built twice in a row right now AFACIT. Nothing to do with tests or pip or anything.. Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk `-
Bug#883218: RFS: elpy/1.20.0-1 [ITP]
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 12:24:05AM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: > Dear Nicholas, > > > the experience I gained while investigating them will make diagnosing > > potential future autopkgtest failures faster > > I trust I'm not hearing any kind of apologetic subtext in your > reply.. If I look think about anything that I might be vain enough > to claim I "know", I usually learnt it when something broke. Or I > broke it. :) David Bremner tells me "the fancy word for that is experiential learning" :p As far as subtext...mm, it wasn't intentional, and my paragraph is kind of unclear, but it's possible there's some unconscious self-promotion or a ":. autopkgtest is good" subtext. I'm optimistic about autopkgtest and DebCI. Here is why: > Anyway, thank you for your kind comments. Do let me know if/when > you have any updates to the package, particularly one that fixes the > FTBFS twice-in-a-row. This was solved in #896998 "python-pip: missing required _vendor module. Broken ${python:Depends}?". Something in the sid's Python ecosystem changed, broke python-pip, which broke Elpy's lisp parsing of "python -m pip --help", which broke various self-tests. I expect Elpy's many self-tests are going to be a simultaneous PITA and indirect QA tool, because the package will function as a kind of canary for Python regressions in sid. I'm sure there are other packages that do this and Elpy's not unique in this way, of course. > This interaction has made me think that a Debian Maintainer > application should be on your TODO as well. Thank you! :-D That means a lot to me. Debian Maintainer since 2016-12-21 ;-) https://nm.debian.org/person/sten Cheers, Nicholas signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#883218: RFS: elpy/1.20.0-1 [ITP]
Dear Nicholas, > the experience I gained while investigating them will make diagnosing > potential future autopkgtest failures faster I trust I'm not hearing any kind of apologetic subtext in your reply.. If I look think about anything that I might be vain enough to claim I "know", I usually learnt it when something broke. Or I broke it. :) Anyway, thank you for your kind comments. Do let me know if/when you have any updates to the package, particularly one that fixes the FTBFS twice-in-a-row. This interaction has made me think that a Debian Maintainer application should be on your TODO as well. Best wishes, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk `-
Bug#883218: RFS: elpy/1.20.0-1 [ITP]
Hi Chris, Re: FTBS due to self-test failure due to python-pip bug. I arguably could have waited a day, until your container would probably auto-update... Honestly it was a positive experience that you discovered errors during the sponsorship process, because the experience I gained while investigating them will make diagnosing potential future autopkgtest failures faster and more productive--and of course, it's always better to catch potential problems before the first upload. I see now that working on expanding on the variety of test-cases should be an tireless pursuit, and it's really nice to see all of the cases autopkgtest tests for! Most of all thank you for your patience and responsiveness to updates. It was truly a pleasure working with you. Sincerely, Nicholas P.S. Bart, thank you for taking care of the housekeeping for this bug :-) signature.asc Description: PGP signature