package: release.debian.org x-debbugs-cc: debian-policy@lists.debian.org, piuparts-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org, Adrian Bunk <b...@debian.org>
Hi, filing this as a bug now. Please reassign to src:piuparts once you have decided... On Sat, Jan 05, 2019 at 03:34:23PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote: > in > https://github.com/anbe42/piuparts/commit/283dac3ae7e31fee51efb836468cd8ca5b61584f > (not yet merged into the main piuparts repo) Andreas proposes to file bugs > regarding failing to purge with severity 'serious" because "old bugs are > filed/fixed and any failure due to a regression in sid will block migration > anyway", while we used to treat 'failing to purge' bugs as severity > 'important' as in practice those bugs are merely annoying (while being a > clear policy violation). > > There's also at least #918312 filed by Adrian Bunk. > > The reasoning that these bugs will block migrations anyway sounds sound > - except for new packages though! > > So I would like to have the opinion of the release team if you also > think that those bugs should be filed with severity 'serious' nowadays. > (As it was their opinion that this shouldn't be done previously.) > > What do you think? this led to this discussion on #-release: <ivodd> h01ger: what does 'fails to purge' mean? the purge fails (gives errors) or the purge 'succeeds', but files are left? <h01ger> both <ivodd> and with 'both' you mean: 'either of these will produce that error'? <h01ger> yes. https://piuparts.debian.org/templates/mail/ lists 5 cases with purge failures <ivodd> personally, if the purge command fails, I wouldn't even hesitate to\ call the serious (I'm surprised it wasn't filed as serious before) <ivodd> if the command succeeds and files are left over, I might hesitate a bit, but on the other hand, if you can't remove all the files, you have no right to call that a 'successful' purge <ivodd> so I wouldn't mind if that was filed as serious as well <h01ger> usually purges are done manually so failing to purge with exit 1 doesnt really have an effect. thats why it was important only <ivodd> well, it means something is wrong, and the user gets to clean it up manually <ivodd> but I don't think we disagree here :) <h01ger> :) <ivodd> I don't really like adding new cases for RC bugs just before the freeze, but if this type of error has been tested for quite some time, then it isn't really a 'new' case <h01ger> ivodd: i think i will reply to the bug via submit@bugs.d.o (assigned to release.d.o) and include our replies there <h01ger> yeah <ivodd> ok <h01ger> it has been tested since lenny :) <ivodd> piuparts++ <h01ger> :) thanks! -- cheers, Holger ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature