[Debian-salsa-ci] Enable job 'missing-breaks' by default?

[Otto Kekäläinen]

Hi!

Do you think it is a good idea if I send this email today/tomorrow to
debian-devel@?

*****************
Subject: Salsa CI job 'missing-breaks' to be enabled by default
staring March 1st

Salsa CI has had for many years the job 'missing-breaks' that
complements piuparts by checking that the files a package introduce
don't clash with files shipped by any other package in the
distribution without having proper Breaks/Replaces in the
debian/control file. This job works well, being quick to run and has
zero false positives in our experience.

We plan to enable this job next weekend, and make it fail pipelines in
a month from now.

If you have any comments, feel free to reply to this email thread or
take part in the discussion at
https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/merge_requests/578

## Schedule

1. March 1st: Enable this job by default, but in allow_failure mode,
making Salsa CI yellow on packages that fail on this job
2. March 31st: Remove the allow_failure mode, potentially making the
Salsa CI red for packages that fail on this job

## Appendix: error examples

Example output when end users run into this category of issues:

$ apt upgrade
...
Unpacking example (from .../foo_1.0-1_all.deb) ...
dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/foo_1.0-1_all.deb (--unpack):
 trying to overwrite '/usr/share/man/man8/example.8.gz', which is also
in package bar 2.2

Example output from the job on failure:

$ check_for_missing_breaks_replaces.py -o
${WORKING_DIR}/missing_breaks.xml --changes-file
${WORKING_DIR}/*.changes
[ERROR] Missing Breaks/Replaces found
[ERROR] foo conflicts with bar files: {'/usr/share/man/man8/example.8.gz'}
*****************


On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 at 16:32, Otto Kekäläinen <otto at debian.org> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I have this MR open:
> https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/merge_requests/578
> "Enable job 'missing-breaks' by default"
>
> What do you folks recon, can we merge it on e.g. a Saturday morning?
> Should we flip it into 'allow_failure: true' first? What would be the
> best rollout strategy?
>
> We haven't added any new jobs for a long time and there is no standard
> practice yet on how to avoid breaking too many pipelines (or even
> stats to track if pipelines break).