On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 09:32:47PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Michael Stone dixit:
So your position is that rng-tools 2-unofficial-mt.14-1+b2 and rng-tools-debian
2-unofficial-mt.14-3 both in buster are completely different codebases?
No, no, no, of course not. I’m talking about sid (and therefore testing).
Even before the release of buster, rng-tools in sid was 5 already and
therefore unusable. It simply did not migrate in time for buster,
thankfully, but the presence of rng-tools-debian would have helped,
even so, to alleviate that.
It was a botched NMU which happened without discussion. The fix is to
overwrite it with a new package.
Yes, after both getting a suggestion to do so (via Launchpad) from
one of the developers involved *and* running into the problem that
rng-tools (in sid) was version 5 and that not getting fixed.
you can fix it right now!
come up with a better name. rng-tools-legacy makes more sense, or you could
It would have made more sense, but we’re past release now, so…
you can transition right now! I really don't understand why your
attitude has been "I did this thing, I'm not going to change it, and I'm
not going to take the remaining steps needed to resolve the mess".
rng-tools-debian because you really want to please at least take care of
cleaning up the rng-tools transition.
I could take over rng-tools and transition them to rng-tools-debian,
but this isn’t desired in most cases, so this is really between the
maintainers of rng-tools and rng-tools5 in my eyes.
there is *no* migration path between rng-tools legacy and rng-tools5.
The only transition that makes sense *for debian users* is to
consolidate rng-tools and rng-tools-debian. *Of course* the migration
that's desired for debian users is to migrate from rng-tools to some
other rng-tools legacy package, otherwise people would be running
rng-tools5.
you keep talking about launchpad, but this is a conversation in debian
channels about a debian package. what ubuntu did is irrelevant, what
matters is the experience for users of debian (particularly debian
stable, for which the situation is as I outlined in the previous mail)
The situation in debian unstable is messier *but there is a reason we
call it unstable* and it's better to fix the situation for released
versions than to worry about unstable users.
