On 31/01/11 at 00:29 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > The best incentive for adoption in this case is having periodic runs of > package tests, with reporting. At first glance, I'm tempted to propose > to use grid archive rebuilds to run tests. Lucas: how much work would it > be to hack your rebuild scripts and infrastructure to run tests (if > available)?
Hi, If there's a packaged tool to run the test suite on a given package, then it's quite easy to integrate it into my infrastructure. But I clearly do not have the time to get autopkgtest's code back in shape first. > Lucas' approach to log digging has usually been > collaborative: once a run is available, we ask on -qa to review > logs. This is of course not as good as automatic reporting (e.g. a-la > lintian.d.o), but is a start. Well, it has rarely worked like that. Most of the time, I just do the log analysis + bug filing alone. That means that the tool to run the test suite must be built with filing bugs in mind: it should provide all the needed info in the logfile, so that developers can easily reproduce the failure without asking the bug reporter. - Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110131151326.ga2...@xanadu.blop.info
