[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#884154: Bug#884154: FTBFS with chai 4.1.2 in experimental
On Sat, 16 Dec 2017 17:14:07 + Ghislain Vaillant wrote> I don't know anything about chai. Besides, since you are its maintainer, > I would expect the investigation to be done by yourself rather than myself. With help from Aruna, I was able to fix all other packages and now this is the only package blocking a chai 4 upload to unstable. She was not able to reproduce this bug, also because of #887583 I can't confirm the failure again. See #887583 you did not even get a heads up when mocha was updated :( signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#884154: Bug#884154: FTBFS with chai 4.1.2 in experimental
On ശനി 16 ഡിസംബര് 2017 11:16 വൈകു, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > You are deliberately taking an extreme case to fulfill your narrative. I > would not fit nodejs and chai in the same basket. see below, ruby-webmock is comparable here. >> I did not even get heads up with webmock transition in ruby team. It was >> right away FTBFS and autoremoval from testing for packages failing to >> build with webmock 3. > > And? I had to get the tests ported to ruby-webmock 3, not the person who uploaded ruby-webmock 3. 3 of my packages got removed from testing. >> I can try and help, but as maintainer of libjs-fetch, it is your >> responsibility to fix issues of your package when dependencies change. > > We are talking about a *test* dependencies which now makes the build > fail after a major version bump. It makes sense to expect more > information from the corresponding maintainer. That is how ruby-webmock, ruby-rspec etc were handled. > Should we expect every single maintainer affected by an FTBFS to go read > the release notes of chai in order to figure what broke between version > 3 and 4. I am very skeptical about this. yes, at least that is how I had to do with many ruby test framework transitions and I think that is only reasonable or we can't really update any package that is depended on by large number of packages. >> 1. chai itself is FTBFS with nodejs 6 > > That's unfortunate indeed. > >> 2. we generally want to ship the latest versions > > But not systematically. > >> 3. Some packages are already starting to require newer versions of chai, >> for example node-yargs (whose tests are disabled currently). > > It makes sense to disable them if they specifically require chai >= 4. > Right now I did that, but going forward, it makes to sense to disable/port tests of packages that needs an older version. That is how any transition is handled, chai is not anything special. I know it is hard and I have to do the same for my other packages too, but that is part of what it takes to maintain a package. >> You could ask upstream to move to chai 4 and take their help. Or you >> could also disable tests. > > Disabling the tests would be a serious downgrade considering testing is > currently working, unlike node-yargs. I am seriously uncomfortable with > this proposal. node-yargs tests are working with chai 4 and we are in a better to position to support chai 4 than chai 3.5 for buster. > I can ask upstream, though chai is officially pinned at version 2.x there. > I do that regularly. I did that for ruby-webmock 3. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#884154: Bug#884154: FTBFS with chai 4.1.2 in experimental
Le 16/12/17 à 17:31, Pirate Praveen a écrit : On ശനി 16 ഡിസംബര് 2017 10:44 വൈകു, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: I don't know anything about chai. Besides, since you are its maintainer, I would expect the investigation to be done by yourself rather than myself. No, that is not how a transition is supposed to work. Do you expect maintainer of nodejs package to fix all issues of all packages using nodejs by themselves when updating nodejs versions? You are deliberately taking an extreme case to fulfill your narrative. I would not fit nodejs and chai in the same basket. I did not even get heads up with webmock transition in ruby team. It was right away FTBFS and autoremoval from testing for packages failing to build with webmock 3. And? I can try and help, but as maintainer of libjs-fetch, it is your responsibility to fix issues of your package when dependencies change. We are talking about a *test* dependencies which now makes the build fail after a major version bump. It makes sense to expect more information from the corresponding maintainer. Should we expect every single maintainer affected by an FTBFS to go read the release notes of chai in order to figure what broke between version 3 and 4. I am very skeptical about this. I meant context about why the package now FTBFS. I understand this is a transition and I don't think uploading to unstable is wise before FTBFS issues such as this one are fixed. Is there an urgency in having chai 4.x in testing/unstable? Indeed, that is why it is uploaded first to experimental and giving heads up to packages affected by this transition. We can definitely wait for a reasonable time before uploading to unstable. Which is appreciated. 1. chai itself is FTBFS with nodejs 6 That's unfortunate indeed. 2. we generally want to ship the latest versions But not systematically. 3. Some packages are already starting to require newer versions of chai, for example node-yargs (whose tests are disabled currently). It makes sense to disable them if they specifically require chai >= 4. You could ask upstream to move to chai 4 and take their help. Or you could also disable tests. Disabling the tests would be a serious downgrade considering testing is currently working, unlike node-yargs. I am seriously uncomfortable with this proposal. I can ask upstream, though chai is officially pinned at version 2.x there. -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#884154: Bug#884154: FTBFS with chai 4.1.2 in experimental
On ശനി 16 ഡിസംബര് 2017 10:44 വൈകു, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > I don't know anything about chai. Besides, since you are its maintainer, > I would expect the investigation to be done by yourself rather than myself. No, that is not how a transition is supposed to work. Do you expect maintainer of nodejs package to fix all issues of all packages using nodejs by themselves when updating nodejs versions? I did not even get heads up with webmock transition in ruby team. It was right away FTBFS and autoremoval from testing for packages failing to build with webmock 3. I can try and help, but as maintainer of libjs-fetch, it is your responsibility to fix issues of your package when dependencies change. > I meant context about why the package now FTBFS. I understand this is a > transition and I don't think uploading to unstable is wise before FTBFS > issues such as this one are fixed. Is there an urgency in having chai > 4.x in testing/unstable? Indeed, that is why it is uploaded first to experimental and giving heads up to packages affected by this transition. We can definitely wait for a reasonable time before uploading to unstable. 1. chai itself is FTBFS with nodejs 6 2. we generally want to ship the latest versions 3. Some packages are already starting to require newer versions of chai, for example node-yargs (whose tests are disabled currently). You could ask upstream to move to chai 4 and take their help. Or you could also disable tests. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#884154: Bug#884154: FTBFS with chai 4.1.2 in experimental
Le 16/12/17 à 17:07, Pirate Praveen a écrit : On ശനി 16 ഡിസംബര് 2017 08:41 വൈകു, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: Why is this happening with chai 4.x and not 3.5? That is what we need to find out. Possibly some deprecated methods are removed from new version. I don't know anything about chai. Besides, since you are its maintainer, I would expect the investigation to be done by yourself rather than myself. Sorry, but I am gonna need more context to fix this. We are trying to update chai from 3.5 to 4.x but noticed this package fails with chai 4.x. Once we upload chai 4.x to unstable, it will cause FTBFS (and severity will be changed to serious) and we wanted to give a heads up before that. This is the normal procedure of a transition. I meant context about why the package now FTBFS. I understand this is a transition and I don't think uploading to unstable is wise before FTBFS issues such as this one are fixed. Is there an urgency in having chai 4.x in testing/unstable? -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#884154: Bug#884154: FTBFS with chai 4.1.2 in experimental
On ശനി 16 ഡിസംബര് 2017 08:41 വൈകു, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > Why is this happening with chai 4.x and not 3.5? That is what we need to find out. Possibly some deprecated methods are removed from new version. > Sorry, but I am gonna need more context to fix this. We are trying to update chai from 3.5 to 4.x but noticed this package fails with chai 4.x. Once we upload chai 4.x to unstable, it will cause FTBFS (and severity will be changed to serious) and we wanted to give a heads up before that. This is the normal procedure of a transition. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel