pkgme test run over ARB apps

[Andrew Mitchell]

On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 11:13:26PM -0700, Jono Bacon wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Daniel Holbach
> <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > Hello everybody,
> >
> > I just finished conducting a test-run of all the apps (in all states of
> > myApps queues) of https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/arb/ through
> > pkgme.
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to do this work, Daniel.
> 
> > Summary:
> > ========
> >
> > While the list above reads like a catastrophe at first glance, it's
> > actually not. The list above contains all apps, even the rejected ones,
> > so a lot of breakage was to be expected.
> >
> > The good news is that almost all the python distutils apps passed a run
> > through pkgme and that once some issues in the cmake backend are worked
> > out, there will probably be a bunch of cmake apps as well.
> >
> > Also with a list of specific bug reports, it might become easier to
> > start fixing things, and as I have looked at the code and tinkered (just
> > a little bit) with it I must say that it's a pleasure to work with.
> 
> I agree that this is a good start, and I think if we can identify the
> bugs and grow a community around contributing, we can make good
> progress. Michael Hall will be releasing a tutorial and a call for
> community contributed pkgme backends tomorrow.
> 
> In terms of the ARB though, I think pkgme is not mature enough to
> efficiently and reliably package applications today. I would not be
> surprised if it will be ready for 12.10, but right now I would like to
> propose that we require PPA submissions to keep things moving through
> the queue until pkgme gets to a point where it can package most
> submissions. Thoughts?
> 
>    Jono


I'm happy with continuing to require PPA submissions until we can see pkgme
doing a good job on a majority of submissions. It seems like a great project,
but I think there'll always be a fair bit of variance in how upstreams
structure their apps & build systems.

Andrew