On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 12:00:29PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello Adrian,
> Thank you for your continued effort to get this bug resolved.
> On Sat, Mar 10 2018, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >> Please expand on why you think this is the way we have to proceed.
> > you skipped the part of my email with the explanation:
> > with such a piecemeal approach
> > we risk fragmentation based on debhelper compat level used, with every
> > new compat level installing different files in different locations.
> This is not inevitable. What I am envisaging is:
> - we hash out our preferred solution either in this bug or in the
> debhelper bug, with the debhelper maintainer having the final say on
> what gets implemented
> - debhelper implements all of that solution at exactly one compat level
> - the archive starts to use that compat level
> - Policy is updated.
> This is the standard way to make changes to Policy. The alternative is
> releases of Policy rendering many packages buggy, and that is undesirable.
The standard way is to have a transition period where policy allows for both
behaviour. This way, debhelper can be updated without breaking policy
and developers would have a reference for the new behaviour.
Then the old behaviour is deprecated.
Imagine a large red swirl here.