Guillem Jover writes (Re: [DEP 8] About XS-Testsuite: autopkgtest: time to
remove XS- ?):
On Fri, 2014-01-03 at 19:40:54 +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
No, it just means that I gave up.
Oh, ok. :/ Personally I see it has similar drawbacks to the discarded
Build-Options field that some people
On Fri, 2014-01-03 at 19:40:54 +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
* Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org, 2014-01-03, 13:13:
Given that you (at least) seemed to show opposition to the field
(AFAIR), and that you've done an independent implementation of the
runner; does 692704 mean that you changed mind?
On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 06:09:51PM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
On 2013-12-27 17:35, Guillem Jover wrote:
Do you know how many packages are there with autopkgtest support,
and how many do not declare the field?
For the former, apt-file search -a source debian/tests/control should
do[0].
Hi Jakub!
On Fri, 2013-12-27 at 17:35:28 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
On Fri, 2013-12-27 at 17:41:26 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
the use of autopkgtest as documented in DEP 8 is taking momentum.
How about allowing a Testsuite field to replace the XS-Testsuite field?
Last time this came
Stefano Zacchiroli writes (Re: [DEP 8] About XS-Testsuite: autopkgtest: time
to remove XS- ?):
To save others the time of doing this, in attachment the results of
checking for debian/tests/control with apt-file and of grep-dctrl'ing
Sources to check for Testsuite: autopkgtest field entry. I've
[ adding autopkgtest-devel to Cc: ]
On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 12:36:38PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
FWIW, an old MBF about absent Testsuite: autopkgtest is at [1] and
looks halfway through completion. Some of the already resolved issues
were initially marked wontfix, but have then been
* Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org, 2014-01-03, 13:13:
Given that you (at least) seemed to show opposition to the field
(AFAIR), and that you've done an independent implementation of the
runner; does 692704 mean that you changed mind?
No, it just means that I gave up.
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To
Hello everybody,
the use of autopkgtest as documented in DEP 8 is taking momentum.
How about allowing a Testsuite field to replace the XS-Testsuite field?
If people like the idea, I can send a patch to dpkg if needed.
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Illkirch-Graffenstaden, France
--
To
Hi!
On Fri, 2013-12-27 at 17:41:26 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
the use of autopkgtest as documented in DEP 8 is taking momentum.
How about allowing a Testsuite field to replace the XS-Testsuite field?
Last time this came up here, it didn't look like we got consensus on
whether the field was
On 27 December 2013 16:35, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
Hi!
On Fri, 2013-12-27 at 17:41:26 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
the use of autopkgtest as documented in DEP 8 is taking momentum.
How about allowing a Testsuite field to replace the XS-Testsuite field?
Last time this came
On 2013-12-27 17:35, Guillem Jover wrote:
Hi!
On Fri, 2013-12-27 at 17:41:26 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
the use of autopkgtest as documented in DEP 8 is taking momentum.
How about allowing a Testsuite field to replace the XS-Testsuite field?
Last time this came up here, it didn't look
11 matches
Mail list logo
