On Sun, Oct 02, 2022 at 08:21:31PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Sun, Oct 02, 2022 at 11:08:47AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > >On Sun, Oct 02, 2022 at 03:53:00PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > >> On Sun, Oct 02, 2022 at 04:43:47PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > >> > What's the plan for upgraded systems with an existing > >> > /etc/apt/sources.list. > >> > Will the new n-f-f section added on upgrades automatically(if non-free > >> > was > >> > enabled before)? > >> > >> So this is the one bit that I don't think we currently have a good > >> answer for. We've never had a specific script to run on upgrades (like > >> Ubuntu do), so this kind of potentially breaking change doesn't really > >> have an obvious place to be fixed. > > > >Is there a reason to not continue to make the packages available in non-free? > >I don't see a reason to force any change on existing systems. > > Two things: > > 1. I'm worried what bugs we might expose by having packages be in two > components at once. > 2. I really don't like the idea of leaving two different > configurations in the wild; it'll confuse people and is more > likely to cause issues in the future IMHO. > > Plus, as Shengjing Zhu points out: we already expect people to manage > the sources.list anyway on upgrades. > I think in the absence of a release upgrade script (which I very much doubt will happen, and be tested, and we can rely will be used, for bookworm), Michael's suggestion seems like a reasonable way forward. I imagine we'll need to patch dak to allow that, but it seems like it should be tractable?
Cheers, Julien
