Proposal: drop rails and its reverse-dependencies from Ubuntu 19.04 [Re: Maintaining language-specific module package stacks]

[Matthias Klose]

On 10.04.19 05:48, Simon Quigley wrote:
> On 4/9/19 10:15 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 10.04.19 04:37, Simon Quigley wrote:
>>> On 4/9/19 9:27 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>>> rails is ready to migrate, there is no puma package in the release pocket. the
>>>> failing puma autopkg test in -proposed shouldn't be any concern.
>>>>
>>>> Filed LP: #1824049 for that.
>>>>
>>>> Now we could go on removing puma from -proposed, and then rails should migrate.
>>>> How can we do that without removal?
>>>
>>> (disclaimer: not on the release team)
>>>
>>> This isn't a bug in Britney; Britney is designed to block on *any*
>>> autopkgtest failures if there aren't any test hints (thus, a documented
>>> reason for it failing). Passing autopkgtests for all packages is a
>>> release goal, and unless the package has a hint (which is an exception
>>> to the rule), any failing autopkgtests shouldn't let a package into the
>>> release pocket. This autopkgtest should be evaluated to see if it's a
>>> real regression in rails or if it's puma autopkgtests not working properly.
>>
>> Call it a britney bug or a proposed-migration bug.  But to what extent should we
>> care about a regression which doesn't show in the software that we ship?  It's
>> certainly not contradicting your statement "Passing autopkgtests for all
>> packages is a release goal", because puma then wouldn't be part of the release.
>>  Now remove rails and dependencies and you might be able to update to a new ruby
>> version much earlier, with even more regressions outside the archive.
> 
> I think we should care about it to the extent that we can ensure that
> puma's failure is not caused by ruby.

s/ruby/rails/ ? ruby currently isn't part of any migration.

> If puma's autopkgtests are
> flaky/unfixable without Very Horrible Hacks, they should be hinted. If
> the failures are irrelevant to the ruby update, ruby should be hinted
> when all other rdep pass their tests. If the puma test failure is easy
> to fix, we should solve that, and then we're done here. All of these
> actions can be completed without the Archive Admins.

But in this case, puma would migrate with rails and you have the incompatible
puma and rails versions in the release pocket.