On 5/1/24 11:02 AM, Maciej Barć wrote: > Well, not really, there were many cases where pkg was broken on sandbox! > The latest example would be nim (before I updated it myself) where > contributor submitted broken pkg without telling anybody. It was a WIP > PR but nowhere they specified that it did not merge under sandbox. I > want to encourage contributors to outright say when they know/think > something might be wrong with package.
And adding another checkbox is going to stop people from submitting WIP draft PRs without marking them as drafts? Maybe the solution here is that developers who merge patches from contributors should test the PR before merging. At least if you don't have a preexisting relationship with the contributor such that you have trust in the contributor to publish high quality ebuilds that pass basic smoketests. I mean, you probably want to do that anyway because if someone shows up with their first ever PR and the change looks okay but has a broken checksum it is awfully hard to tell without actually running it. I certainly hope that if PRs are merged without being tested locally by the developer doing the merge, that it's for proxied packages contributed by the proxied maintainer, not packages where the Developer that maintains the package is merging untested patches just because someone suggested a change. And if proxied maintainers make a habit of breaking their packages by submitting WIP drafts maybe they aren't such great proxied maintainers and there's a larger infrastructural problem going on. -- Eli Schwartz
OpenPGP_0x84818A6819AF4A9B.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
