[SSSD] [PATCH] Add basic support for CI test execution

Lukas Slebodnik lslebodn at redhat.com
Wed Jun 25 12:54:23 UTC 2014


On (25/06/14 13:59), Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>On (25/06/14 14:38), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>On 06/25/2014 02:29 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>>On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 01:02:04PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:55:15PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>>Sorry, it looks terible.
>>>>>If you want to maintain dependencies yourself in CI script. Feel free to do in
>>>>>extra git repository "sssd CI" on github.
>>>>
>>>>We already have stuff in contrib/ that is not part of core SSSD and
>>>>might even not work as far as we know (gentoo initscript..)
>>>>
>>>>>If you want to have script in upstream sssd repo you will need to ger rid of
>>>>>this duplication.
>>>>
>>>>Except you still have to maintain the Debian deps.
>>>>
>>>>While I don't share the fear Nick has over code in RPM scriptlets, I
>>>>don't see the deplist as a blocker.
>>>
>>>Would it be possible to build the packages (would require something like
>>>a deb: target in Makefile.am) and then let yum/apt figure out the
>>>dependencies and install them?
>>
>>It is possible.
>>
>>However, aside from the increased maintenance burden, that would essentially
>>require having packaging for any other distribution we would like to test with
>>as well, or forgoing that approach there, mostly negating the benefit.
>>
>There is very big change that new dependencies (or new version of packages)
                s/change/chance/

>will be only in fedora rawhide and will not be packaged in any other
>distributions. How will you solve it? You will need to either use custom
>repositories (COPR, ppa ...) or install dependencies from source.
>
>Do you want to maintain packages for debian yourself? How will you solve it
>with hardcoded dependencies in CI script? Will you extend if else conditions
>for fedora 20 and fedora rawhide? How do you plan to solve problem on debian?
>
>These are exactly reasons why is very bad to maintain hardcoded build
>dependencies in upstream CI script and current version of CI script
>in upstream at all.
>
>If you want to argue that it is a hypothetical situation. It isn't.
>The best example is the newest version of ding-libs and yelles's patches for
>GPO. It will be pushed into upstream in near future.
>
>>This would also make running even the most basic CI tests, like autoreconf,
>>configure, coding style verification (not done yet), etc., depend on the
>>correctness of the packaging code.
>>
>
>It is real blocker from my POV.
>
>LS
>_______________________________________________
>sssd-devel mailing list
>sssd-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
>https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list