On 2022-07-27 16 h 32, Julian Gilbey wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 07:45:12PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 10:26:33AM -0400, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
The way I see it:
1. We should have a Lintian tag for packages not using the new
pybuild-autodep8 autopkgtest.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 09:32:19PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > I'd be wary about 2.2 and 2.3. I have several packages where I know
> > that an automated test will fail; there are all sorts of weird cases
> > [...]
>
> I'd be wary about adding lintian tags for this, though: with
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 07:45:12PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 10:26:33AM -0400, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> > The way I see it:
> >
> > 1. We should have a Lintian tag for packages not using the new
> > pybuild-autodep8 autopkgtest. It would be even better if this
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 10:26:33AM -0400, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> The way I see it:
>
> 1. We should have a Lintian tag for packages not using the new
> pybuild-autodep8 autopkgtest. It would be even better if this tag would be a
> pointed hint that identified 'manually' written unit
On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 09:18:42 +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> There seems to be little point running both pybuild-autopkgtest and a
> manually written debian/tests/* test suite.
I think it can make sense to have both. d/tests is the right place for
an integration test that checks things like "any
On 2022-07-27 04 h 18, Julian Gilbey wrote:
There seems to be little point running both pybuild-autopkgtest and a
manually written debian/tests/* test suite. So would the script only
add pybuild-autopkgtest to packages which don't have a manually
written debian/tests/* suite?
The way I see
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 11:50:19AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> I think the notes did not capture the consensus correctly. The point was
> that it should be possible to automate updating the `Testsuite:` field
> to run tests with pybuild-autopkgtest, and that we should probably do
> that
On 2022-07-26 20 h 13, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-07-26 at 17:53 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
>
>> Well the idea is to only actually commit the change and upload the
>> package with the new Testsuite value after ensuring that actually works,
>> i.e. that the autopkgtest passes.
>
> This
On Tue, 2022-07-26 at 17:53 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> Well the idea is to only actually commit the change and upload the
> package with the new Testsuite value after ensuring that actually works,
> i.e. that the autopkgtest passes.
This sounds like something for lintian and the Janitor. I
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 03:37:50PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> On July 26, 2022 2:50:19 PM UTC, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> >On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 09:04:27AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 07:52:19PM +0200, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> >> > == pybuild
On July 26, 2022 2:50:19 PM UTC, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 09:04:27AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 07:52:19PM +0200, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
>> > == pybuild improvements ==
>> >
>> > getting the autopkgtest MR in would be great
>> >
>>
On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 09:04:27AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 07:52:19PM +0200, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> > == pybuild improvements ==
> >
> > getting the autopkgtest MR in would be great
> >
> >
On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 07:52:19PM +0200, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> == pybuild improvements ==
>
> getting the autopkgtest MR in would be great
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/dh-python/-/merge_requests/27
>
> We need people to test this MR some more, although it seems
13 matches
Mail list logo
