Hi Chris, [This question came up multiple times already in my e-mails about regressions in autopkgtests.]
On 27-06-18 23:48, Chris Lamb wrote: > (Paul, might make more sense to file bugs in future? Much easier to > track and/or re-assign if necessary..) I do that when I am *somewhat* confident which package should in principal fix the regression. However, often I lack the time to dive deeper and/or am unfamiliar with the packages involved and/or how the autopkgtest in question works. To circumvent that problem, I send the e-mails that we agreed upon on this list, albeit I don't due that automatically even, because several packages have an extremely large fall-out. This fall-out may be real (it appears to me that the current python3-defaults may be an example of that as packages seem to be not ready for Python3.7) or mostly just a matter of re-triggering tests as the stack is highly in flux and should be considered together (like the recent KDE stack update). However, I can see the point and I prefer bugs personally as well. So let's check what people here think of my proposal for guidance for "by-standers" (I mean people like me that are not maintainer of either the triggering package or one of the packages which autopkgtest regresses). Proposal: If one (me) can't determine the likely principle package that needs fixing after some effort [1], one bug (per upload of the triggering package) can be filed against the trigging package with the other packages in X-Debbugs-CC and in Affects at normal severity. This bug can contain similar text as we agreed upon earlier [2] (I'll write a proposal if this idea is not rejected). Paul PS: any tips on how to handle the current python3-defaults situation is highly appreciated. https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=python3-defaults [1] Including, but not limited to, comparing the autopkgtest logs of the passing and failing test, looking at patterns in the fall-out, examining recent other regressions for the same failing autopkgtest, checking for existing FTBFS or similar bugs. [2] https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
