El sábado, 6 de diciembre de 2025 a las 22:45 Christian Hesse escribió: > Lukas Fleischer <[email protected]> on Fri, 2025/12/05 18:00: > > Quoting Christian Hesse (2025-12-05 07:47:23) > > > Did that cover all your questions? > > > > Thanks! For the most part, yes, I think so. Two follow-ups: > > > > 1. Are we going to have [extra-unstable-staging] for rebuilds, or do we > > plan to have a different mechanism to handle soname rebuilds across > > the new repos? > > Oh, good question... I have not yet had that case. We would hit it when the > pre-release bumps a soname, right? So something like systemd pushing a > pre-release where libudev is bumped from libudev.so.1 to libudev.so.2... > > At least for the packages that I care about here these cases should be > pretty rare... :-p > But that might be different for others.
I don't think this new unstable repo should add more burden for other PMs when they need to do so some rebuild. Whenever there is a soname bump that affects a package in [unstable], the maintainer will be notified (since they are also maintaining the stable package), and it should be their responsibility to coordinate with the rebuild author to make sure the unstable packages are rebuild asap when the rebuild moves to testing. And if that doesn't happen soon enough, [unstable] users should be able to temporarily endure the pain (it's called [unstable] for a reason). That's the way it has worked for decades for the [kde-unstable] repo, which is often affected by this sort of issue.
