Hi Chris, On 03-09-2020 18:12, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > * Xavier <y...@debian.org> [200903 16:10]: >>> I must say I find it unacceptable that autopkgtests which are being >>> used to test migration from Debian unstable to Debian testing to rely >>> on code from random places on the Internet, which Debian Developers >>> have no control over. >> >> I understand your point of view. We found this way to reproduce upstream >> test in this package that had no test before. What would be the best: >> * embed test libraries in source package (like apache2) ? >> + embed copies of dovecot and some other package that exists in >> Debian but with a different version ? >> -- or -- >> + try to patch upstream test to use Debian packages in test ? (I >> tried without success) >> * remove autopkgtest files ? >> * render autopkgtest success "skippable" ? > > CC-ed d-release@ as they probably have stronger opinions on this > question.
ftp-master has an even stronger opinion, see https://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html (Non-Main II). > A side question there might be: "Why does CI have access > to the Internet?" Well, nowadays there is the needs-internet restriction to exactly document the fact. Then the tools can (but aren't yet) be configured to treat the test as intended by the stakeholders. > In an ideal world I'd go with "package test libraries for Debian". Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
