#713073 PTS: show library transition message also on the source package page

Package:
qa.debian.org
Source:
qa.debian.org
Submitter:
Joachim Reichel
Date:
2013-08-21 11:15:04 UTC
Severity:
wishlist
#713073#5
Date:
2013-06-22 10:20:55 UTC
From:
To:
The PTS should show notes about involvement in ongoing or upcoming transitions
also for the package causing that transition (the text might need a slightly
different wording in that case).

Example: http://packages.qa.debian.org/o/openscad.html shows under "testing
migration": "This package is part of the ongoing testing transition known as
libcgal10. [...]". But unfortunately there is no such link on
http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/cgal.html .

Joachim
#713073#10
Date:
2013-08-16 15:29:05 UTC
From:
To:
Hi.

@Release team: Joachim Breitner asked to patch PTS so that it displays
not only the packages involved in a transition, but also the packages
that cause the transition (see the example below).

Il 22/06/2013 12:20, Joachim Reichel ha scritto:

Is Ben aware of this information? If so, could you please export it in a
machine parsable way? If not, would you consider adding it?

Thanks, Giovanni.
#713073#15
Date:
2013-08-19 14:23:39 UTC
From:
To:
Hi,

Am Freitag, den 16.08.2013, 17:29 +0200 schrieb Giovanni Mascellani:
                         ^-- should be Joachim Reichel


Greetings,
Joachim
#713073#20
Date:
2013-08-20 07:24:13 UTC
From:
To:
Le 16/08/2013 17:29, Giovanni Mascellani a écrit :

Ben is aware of the packages that match the "affected" predicate. It
seems that predicates the release team uses exclude the packages that
cause the transition. For example, in libcogl12, the "affected"
predicate is:

.depends ~ /libcogl(9|12)|libcogl-pango(0|12)/ & !(.source ~ "cogl")

The last clause explicitly excludes the cogl source package, and
therefore cogl doesn't appear in the transition monitoring page (nor in
its PTS). I don't know why this clause was added.


Cheers,
#713073#25
Date:
2013-08-20 07:41:16 UTC
From:
To:
In the particular case, yes.  We have had (and suppose sometimes still
have) transitions where the "introducing source package" is not "affected".


I think the reason why we prefer having the introducing source package
as "unaffected", is because it will be taken care of by a source upload
(i.e. there is usually nothing for us to do about that package).  The
introducing package also tends to create its own "dependency level" in
the tracker, so excluding almost always removes a dependency level in
the tracker.

~Niels
#713073#30
Date:
2013-08-20 08:16:16 UTC
From:
To:
Le 20/08/2013 09:41, Niels Thykier a écrit :

The tool was meant to track packages that need sourceful uploads too...

You could also make it good, so that it is hidden by the javascript foo.

Why does it matter to have an additional dependency level?


Cheers,
#713073#39
Date:
2013-08-21 11:11:05 UTC
From:
To:
Sure, but it is not uncommon for the "epicenter" of the transition (i.e.
the package triggering the transition) to be omitted.  Other packages
needing sourceful uploads are not hidden/omitted.

The usually happens on its own when the package is rebuilt AFAICT.

Personally, I do not care much either way.  I wanted to report how the
tool is used in practise.  Whether that is a good use or not, is an
entirely different matter.

~Niels