Hi James, On 06-06-18 13:59, James McCoy wrote: > On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 08:44:26PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: >> Recently your autopkgtest¹ started failing due to a new version of >> libuv1. > > So, a library change causes one of its users to break and the user is > what gets the bug? Why is this not a bug against the library?
If autopkgtest wasn't hurt by the mirror issue, I would have noticed in time and send an e-mail to both the maintainer of the library and the package which autopkgtest breaks while pointing at https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation, as agreed on debian-devel in the thread starting with [1]. Unfortunately we did have that mirror issue and the regression went unnoticed. As I don't know lua-nvim, it's autopkgtest or libuv1, I can't judge if the current autopkgtest failure is any of the: """ new bug in the candidate package (fix the package) bug in the test case that only gets triggered due to the update (fix the reverse dependency, but see below) out-of-date reference date in the test case that captures a former bug in the candidate package (fix the reverse dependency, but see below) deprecation of functionality that is used in the reverse dependency and/or its test case (discussion needed) regression due to other packages from unstable that are installed to fulfill (versioned) Depends (contact maintainers of those). """ You as the lua-nvim maintainer are of course free to reassign this bug to the libuv1 package if you think something needs fixing there, but I recommend you explain what you are testing and why it should be fixed in libuv1 if you do so. Paul [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2018/05/msg00061.html
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
