user [email protected] usertags 982159 + sidremove-ignore thanks Hi Marc,
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 01:53:24PM +0900, Marc Dequènes (duck) wrote: > As the maintainer of this package I object to this removal. Honestly I just > don't see the point of this request. Maintainers of wine-development opened > #988246 to block the package from being released, and since it is a > build-dependency for the same reason dxvk is blocked, that does not make it > a broken package. And in fact I'm using it regularly and I can assure you it > works fine. Thank you for clarifying. Indeed you are arguing that dxvk is one of those rare packages like wine-development, gcc-snapshot and a few others that we use for developing unstable but never want to migrate to a stable release. > As mentioned in the RC bug it was not possible to use stable version since > newer dxvk version required a more recent wine not available at the time. In > #1077188 someone mentioned things have change and I'm looking into it now. > > It feels like this bug report was submitted automatically without any check > of the context and that not very useful IMHO. There is a trade-off involved here. Automating package removals allowed me to remove hundreds of rc-buggy packages from unstable and with very few exceptions (yours included) the initiative was welcomed. I reviewed the list of removals beforehand and tagged a number of packages sidremove-ignore to avoid them getting automatically removed, but I failed to draw the connection to wine-development (which got correctly tagged). So rather than concluding that there was a lack of effort, I suggest that you allow for the occasional mistake in analysis and I am really happy that you caught this one before it caused any damage. The process was intetionally set up to include delays and thus allow maintainer reviews. https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/[email protected]&tag=sidremove-ignore Kind regards Helmut
