Hi Pirate,

Thanks for reaching out.

On 20-03-2023 16:44, Pirate Praveen wrote:
I request bookworm-ignore tags for these bugs (as such there is no immediate breakage, just unmaintained upstreams for these packages).

> yarnpkg: 980316,958686, 1002902, 980316
> node-har-validator: 1024575
> node-request: 956423
> node-request-capture-har: 1002901

As the packages in question are key packages, we can't easily remove them. Hence adding a bookworm-ignore tag doesn't really change the situation in bookworm in any way. Hence, the question is whether fixing it now and adding an exception is better or worse than letting the bug ship in bookworm. If I understand correctly, than the required change would mean a new complex package (corepack) which (again, if I understand correctly) is considered also by you as inappropriate at this time. If you confirm my understanding, I agree that those bugs can be marked bookworm-ignore (I already marked them as bookworm-can-defer, which is less strong and less official).


Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to