Hi Sandro, On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 07:54:35AM -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:59 AM, Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> wrote: > >> For python-skbio it is *really* time to panic *right now*. > >> > >> python-skbio is currently not in testing. > > the last upload (0.5.1-1) was done on Nov 19 and skbio hasnt been in > testing for more than 11 months. if it hasnt reached testing by now, > it must have had several other issues.
Its correct that it *had* issues in the past - but that's what we were working on and we had assumed that all issues are solved now. > >> If this issue is not resolved by Christmas, your Christmas present for > >> the python-skbio maintainers is that their package will definitely not > >> be part of stretch. > > sarcasm wont help you make your point. I agree that sarcasm does not help. However, we were really aiming at having skbio in stretch. > > Thanks for confirming that I was not actually panicing. ;-) > > > > Sandro, would you reconsider my suggestion to revert this > > mini-transition? I do not see a realistic chance that upstream will > > come up with fixes in the next two days. > > how did you reach this conclusion? before i reported this bug upstream > (why didnt you do it?) they probably werent even aware of the issue. Thanks for contacting upstream. I confirm that I planed to do this but several other bugs droped in yesterday and I did not manage. > I think you have multiple actions you can do: > > * actually investigate what the issue is, did you try to do it? you > might also find out the fix is easy and end up submitting a patch > upstream > * engage with upstream to get this fixed by them and backport the > patch to the current package (if they prefer not to release a new > version now) > * skip that test / dont make the build fail if there is a test failure > (for now!). Test suites are made to catch errors, and in this case it > worked! expecting the test suite to pass every time is either > unrealistic or an indication the suite is too shallow. grab > information about the failure and report them upstream, but in the > meantime (since it's a known issue) you can decide to skip the failure In my initial response I mentioned skiping the test. However, I intended to discuss this first since simply hiding the eyes from an upgrading problem is not the prefered way to go. > you say you are in a hurry, and yet you decided to waste a whole day > in this blame-game, i'm sure there is much more you can do to fix > skbio. Sandro, please calm down. I did not tried to play a blame-game. I was busy fixing other RC bugs. I was considering it a 50% chance that a mini-transition might be reverted and thus I started with other packages where 100% action was needed. I also need to admit that I do not feel competent in Numpy details that the time-effort investment for myself makes the time well spent (compared to other tasks). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers