Merge ~bryce/ubuntu/+source/breezy:fix-lp1932313-jammy into ubuntu/+source/breezy:ubuntu/devel

Proposed by Bryce Harrington
Status: Merged
Merge reported by: Bryce Harrington
Merged at revision: 253054ef7dc2a660292d818673fbc9bbed657487
Proposed branch: ~bryce/ubuntu/+source/breezy:fix-lp1932313-jammy
Merge into: ubuntu/+source/breezy:ubuntu/devel
Diff against target: 204 lines (+176/-0)
4 files modified
debian/changelog (+15/-0)
debian/patches/fix-tests-to-work-with-python-3.9.5.patch (+86/-0)
debian/patches/series (+4/-0)
debian/patches/skip-additional-tests-that-fail-with-py3.9.5.patch (+71/-0)
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Bryce Harrington (community) Approve
Canonical Server Pending
Canonical Server Core Reviewers Pending
Canonical Server packageset reviewers Pending
Review via email:

Description of the change

Updates a few tests to work with current python, disables a bunch more that are experiencing module import issues.

It would be nice to fix the tests to pass, however a) I'm not sure breezy is as widely used as it used to be, b) the issues are known upstream yet have remained unfixed for quite some time, and c) breezy has been in FTBFS state for a considerable time and is blocking a variety of other packages from migration. An unfortunate effect of all this is that breezy + company have consumed multiple cycles of +1 maintainer attention so far. I think it's best to just disable the tests for now and get the proposed-migration page cleaned up.

The reason the tests are failing have to do with changes in the module importation logic that has changed in the newer version of python. Breezy does some tinkering with these internal mechanics, particularly in the test harness infrastructure, which appears to behave differently than expected with the new python. Several of us have dug into these internals to try and figure out what's going on, but it's a bit esoteric and thus has been time consuming. I *suspect* the test failures are indicating more a breakage in test infrastructure than actual problems with the main code, so disabling the tests and leaving the diagnosis to upstream feels like the right move. That said, I can't rule out with 100% certainty that there's a legit problem in user-facing code, so appreciate hearing other opinions.


To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Bryce Harrington (bryce) wrote :

Was hoping to get some review feedback, but a review isn't strictly required for this package, and since this is just to unblock proposed-migration, it really worth waiting on.
I'll go ahead and upload to get it off my todo list.

review: Approve

There was an error fetching revisions from git servers. Please try again in a few minutes. If the problem persists, contact Launchpad support.

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.


People subscribed via source and target branches