On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 11:30:51AM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Matthias Klose [2014-01-26 9:53 +0100]:
> > In general I don't like the way how the introduction of autopkg tests forces
> > work on maintainers to do for the migration, when you don't have the time to
> > spend resources or want to use this time to improve packages in other areas.
> > Developer time is limited, and I'm tired being forced to spend time on broken
> > autopkg tests and to spend time to hunt down people to ignore failing or
> > stalling tests on the autopkg test infrastructure.
> Yes, that's a fair point. I believe we should only consider a failed
> autopkgtest in britney if it ever succeeded, so that this doesn't
I was probably too optimistic about implementing this such that they
always have to succeed rather than doing a ratchet scheme. I'd be OK
with changing this in light of experience.
Colin Watson [firstname.lastname@example.org]
ubuntu-devel mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel