On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 10:04:55PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi, > > On 23-02-2025 22:27, Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote: > > Discussing on #salsaci, it came up the idea of triggering autopkgtest > > jobs on ci.d.n workers from the salsa ci pipeline. This has the > > advantage of reproducing the same reference autopkgtest environment. > > However, when binary packages are not available (yet), debci should > > force building them. This would be especially the case of architecture > > that don't have a gitlab runner available. > > For completeness sake, I think we only need this option for architectures > unsupported by salsaci. For the current architectures, what I had/have in > mind (and what works already on the ci.d.n side of things) is that salsaci > sets up an archive that's added to the testbed, like we already do with php, > ocaml, perl and ruby test archives [1]. The freshly build binaries would get > installed from that archive
I don't think that would work, because such archive would need to be specific to each pipeline. Also, we would need some authentication before building/testing a package: we don't want to run untrusted packages from anyone with a salsa account. In the way ci.debian.net works today, the packages we test were signed by someone with upload permissions to the Debian archive.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
