Web lists-archives.com

Re: Dealing with ci.d.n for package regressions

Ian Jackson:
> Paul Gevers writes ("Dealing with ci.d.n for package regressions"):
>> As I just announced on d-d-a¹, we have enabled autopkgtest usage for
>> unstable-to-testing migration.
> This is great.
> I have some suggestions/observations, looking particularly at
>   https://release.debian.org/britney/update_excuses.html

Thanks for having a look at this.  I will answer the two first items as
they are fairly "generic britney" questions.

Side note: We have some documentation at
https://release.debian.org/doc/britney/, which we are happy to receive
patches for.

The source code is: https://salsa.debian.org/release-team/britney2

(See the doc directory)

> 1. Often the heading says
>   Migration status: BLOCKED: Rejected/introduces a regression (please
>   see below)
> I think that here "regression" does not mean an autopkgtest
> regression, but rather a new bug regression ?  That couldwording coudl
> perhaps be clarified.

This is a line summary of the over-all migration status, i.e. the
"worst" status across all policy decisions and rules applied to the package.

The particular case means that *a* policy has concluded that there was a
regression that will require manual fixing.  This could be any of:

 * RC bugs
 * Piuparts
 * autopkgtests (once it is in enforcing)
 * ...

These messages come from:


Suggestions for improvements are welcome.

Also, please note that the YAML variant of the excuses have a status per
policy besides the over-all status.  (Details: Not every check has its
own policy, so the over-all status can in some cases be distinct from
the status of individual policies.)

Example from https://release.debian.org/britney/excuses.yaml:

> - excuses:
>   [...]
>   migration-policy-verdict: REJECTED_PERMANENTLY
>   [...]
>   policy_info:
>     age:
>       age-requirement: 5
>       current-age: 8
>       verdict: PASS
>     autopkgtest:
>       verdict: PASS
>     build-depends:
>       verdict: PASS
>     piuparts:
>       [...]
>     rc-bugs:
>       [...]
>       verdict: PASS
>   [...]
>   source: gcc-8-cross

In this case, gcc-8-cross obtains the REJECT_PERMANENTLY status via the
piuparts policy (rather than the rc-bugs policy).  Said status is the
one triggering the message "BLOCKED: Rejected/introduces a regression
..." (which you mentioned above).

> 2. "Not considered" has always been a bit opaque for me.  It often
> appears when many things have obviously been considered.  What things
> are not considered ?

I think it might make sense to sunset this phrase now that we have more
detailed status messages (the ones above).  Basically, you get "Valid
Candidate" when the over all verdict is "OK" (PASS/PASS_* in the .yaml
file) and "Not considered" otherwise.