anonym wrote (09 May 2014 14:24:40 GMT) : > Because of all this I've finally concluded that I would prefer to keep > on maintaining our "sikuli/rjb adapter" for the time being, and possibly > return to this upstreaming process if Rukuli shows promise to at least > stay maintained for the foreseeable future.
Thanks a lot for this summary! I agree with your conclusions. The only thing that scares me a bit is the need to maintain our own Ruby/RJB/Sikuli adapter, and the lack of people with the right skills + availability + reliability on our team. Anyhow, I can certainly live with that fear, and I guess we can still reconsider whenever this adapter breaks and needs to be updated. Still, I think I would be more comfortable with this decision if someone tried running our test suite in a Jessie environment, first: if it works fine, then we'll know that we won't have to fix our custom adapter for a while, and this would considerably alleviate my fears. I've created #7212 to this end. Do you mind if I assign this ticket to you (anonym), set it as a blocker to make a decision on #6400, and flag it for the 2.0 milestone (on the grounds that making sure our test suite's dependencies won't break to often is definitely an important sustainability matter)? Cheers! -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc _______________________________________________ Tails-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to [email protected].
