On 10/05/2015 11:11 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Oct 05, 2015, at 02:51 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > >> In other distributions (Red Hat and Ubuntu), everyone is aware of this >> kind of issue before uploading, and this kinds of things don't happen. > > Ubuntu at least does have a technical solution that helps ameliorate > archive-wide breakages, and that is -proposed migration. When you upload > e.g. to wily, it gets diverted to wily-proposed and to get promoted it has to > pass a number of tests. The package and their reverses have to build. DEP-8 > tests have to pass, etc. You can get a nice report about which -proposed > promotions are failing: > > http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html
Oh, nice! We do need something like this too. > The downside is that you should probably be proactively checking this list > (poll vs ping) and it can sometimes be difficult to figure out why a promotion > fails or how to fix it. It's a super nice tool, though in some cases, I do see that we may want to ignore it. For example, dozens of packages passing, and just a single leaf one with some issues. > But this does mean that the archive itself is very rarely broken, and it can > be a convenient way to stage package updates that may have effects in parts of > the archive you might not be aware of. If we need the compute power to do it, I have a few proposal for that. I'm all for having a CI / CD also for packages. This IMO is the same topic as having a Gerrit review system (and not just Git) which could do tests on each change of a package even before having them committed to our git. Thomas