On 13 September 2021 1:35:57 pm IST, Julien Puydt <[email protected]> wrote: >Le dimanche 12 septembre 2021 à 20:30 +0200, Yadd a écrit : >> You'll notice that I didn't fault anyone, I just tried not to let >> other groups get stuck with our updates. I think I did something >> clean that avoids breaking other packages until nodejs is updated >> and keeps the upstream format. > >Well, I still felt blamed, and it's only partly justified. > >In that particular case, I saw the problem, produced a -1 with a patch >to avoid breaking deps, but asked around because it was somehow not >satisfying, with mostly two questions: >1. if what I did was a good idea? >2. how to do something clean? > >The summary of the answers is that it was a bad idea (don't diverge >from upstream unless you're ready to take matters on your shoulders), >but there was no clean solution. > >I hence broke things with -2: that's just the first occurrence of an >emerging matter, so waiting won't make it go away. Bite the bullet >rather sooner than later, one may say.
We still has the option to use experimental for understanding breaking changes and giving more time to fix reverse dependencies. I suggested this option too in the earlier thread. I don't think breaking unstable directly is a good idea, we have well established process for dealing with breaking changes properly - using experimental and giving warning bugs to affected packages before the breaking change goes to unstable. Giving people time to fix is important as scrambling to fix an rc bug is more painful, especially if it is not clear which update broke your package. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
