Re: Streamlining the use of Salsa CI on team packages

2019-09-15 Thread Louis-Philippe Véronneau
On 19-09-05 01 h 40, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > Hello folks! > > I'd like to propose we start using Salsa CI for all the team packages. I > think using a good CI for all our packages will help us find packaging > bugs and fix errors before uploads :) > > I also think that when possible,

Re: What is the process to update the DPMT and PAPT policies?

2019-09-15 Thread Scott Kitterman
On September 15, 2019 11:59:08 PM UTC, "Louis-Philippe Véronneau" wrote: >Hi! > >What is the process to update the DPMT and PAPT policies? I feel the >DPMT policy is pretty good and I feel the PAPT policy could copy a >bunch >of stuff from there. > >For example, the PAPT policy doesn't

Re: Streamlining the use of Salsa CI on team packages

2019-09-15 Thread Louis-Philippe Véronneau
On 19-09-15 18 h 01, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 9/15/19 4:10 AM, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: >> On 19-09-14 17 h 35, Thomas Goirand wrote: >>> On 9/13/19 11:08 PM, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: On 19-09-13 05 h 57, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 9/5/19 7:40 AM, Louis-Philippe Véronneau

What is the process to update the DPMT and PAPT policies?

2019-09-15 Thread Louis-Philippe Véronneau
Hi! What is the process to update the DPMT and PAPT policies? I feel the DPMT policy is pretty good and I feel the PAPT policy could copy a bunch of stuff from there. For example, the PAPT policy doesn't include a "Git Procedures" section. I'm guessing the way to go is to clearly propose a

Re: Streamlining the use of Salsa CI on team packages

2019-09-15 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 9/15/19 4:10 AM, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > On 19-09-14 17 h 35, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> On 9/13/19 11:08 PM, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: >>> On 19-09-13 05 h 57, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 9/5/19 7:40 AM, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > Hello folks! > > I'd like to

Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing?

2019-09-15 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 9/15/19 2:26 PM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > Considering that this is bzr we are talking about, a package that is > already entering the graveyard, I think it would be easiest to just > disable the test suite and move on. > > But I would be happier it Thomas at least checked the rdeps before >

Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing?

2019-09-15 Thread Jelmer Vernooij
It's not just bzr, it's also a bunch of plugins for bzr that we'd have to disable the testsuite for - as well as a bunch of other non-bzr-related packages - python-subunit, python-fixtures, python-testscenarios, python-daemon, python-fastimport. Jelmer On 15 September 2019 14:26:35 CEST,

Re: [Help] Re: Bug#939181: cycle: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye

2019-09-15 Thread peter green
> tmp = rt.encrypt('Cycle{}'.format(pickle.dumps(objSave))) Thanks to this hint This hint was *wrong*, it will introduce garbage into the string and the "rotor" code is clearly designed to work with byte strings, not unicode strings. Change it to "tmp=rt.encrypt(

Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing?

2019-09-15 Thread Mattia Rizzolo
Considering that this is bzr we are talking about, a package that is already entering the graveyard, I think it would be easiest to just disable the test suite and move on. But I would be happier it Thomas at least checked the rdeps before dropping packages, at least evaluating if breaking things

Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing?

2019-09-15 Thread Jelmer Vernooij
On 15 September 2019 01:15:11 CEST, Scott Kitterman wrote: >On Saturday, September 14, 2019 6:43:13 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: >> Hi, >> >> As I wrongly thought python-extras was used only by OpenStack stuff, >I >> removed Python 2 support for it. Then someone filed a bug against >>