Bug#1008369: scikit-learn testing migration

[Nilesh Patra]

On 8/13/22 13:34, Andreas Tille wrote:
> The drawback of this solution is that we will not get any warning for
> new *potentially more important* issues since all test failures will be
> ignored now.  For me this is outweighted by the advantage that we can
> present upstream a full log of all issues in certain architectures and
> can open according issues.  I admit I'm not really enthusiastic that
> upstream will care much about this - but at least we have the logs at
> hand and can do something in case someone wants to invest time into
> this.

Considering long term maintainance this does not seem to be nice especially
keeping in mind the fact that sklearn is a key package.
I think it is OK to do it _for the moment_ to allow the dust to settle a bit,
and rm'ed packages to get to their destination once again
but I'd suggest ``incrementally'' enabling the tests once everything is in place.

I agree that upstream is probably not very enthusiastic about fixing those, but
if we get fixes, we should keep propagating them.

In a nutshell, IMO the sklearn revision that enters bookworm _should_ have tests enabled, without
hacks and the tests that do not pass can be disabled (after all, it does not come from our end)

> I do not plan to close bugs #1003165 and #1008369 but I think it is
> appropriate to reduce its severity to important and thus enable the
> package and its dependencies to migrate to testing (I have not checked
> debci yet).

Sounds good, and thanks for caring for it.

> [1] https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/scikit-learn/-/blob/master/debian/rules#L227


-- 
Best,
Nilesh