Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Hello, Uploaded: ruby-airbrussh_1.3.1-2+deb10u1_source.changes ACCEPTED into proposed-updates->stable-new Thanks for your work and help Adam and Paul, -- Samuel Henrique
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Control: tags -1 + confirmed On Wed, 2019-08-21 at 00:22 +0100, Samuel Henrique wrote: > I backported the fix to 1.3.1-2, the version is 1.3.1-2+deb10u1 and I > will need to wait until 1.3.3-1 hits testing*, which is fine (2 > days), to upload it. > > * because the current version in testing is the same as in stable, > and the version in testing needs to be higher/bug fixed in there as > well. > OK, thanks. Regards, Adam
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo Removing moreinfo tag as 1.3.3-1 is on testing and the debdiff for 1.3.1-2+deb10u1 is attached in the previous email, Thanks, -- Samuel Henrique
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Hello Adam, Thanks for your patience and explanation, here's the debdiff with the solution I picked, I backported the fix to 1.3.1-2, the version is 1.3.1-2+deb10u1 and I will need to wait until 1.3.3-1 hits testing*, which is fine (2 days), to upload it. * because the current version in testing is the same as in stable, and the version in testing needs to be higher/bug fixed in there as well. Regards, -- Samuel Henrique ruby-airbrussh_1.3.1-2+deb10u1.debdiff Description: Binary data
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
On Tue, 2019-08-20 at 22:22 +0100, Samuel Henrique wrote: > Hello Adam, > > > It certainly can't be 1.3.2-1+deb10u1, as that version number is > > higher > > than the package in unstable. Either one would need to go with > > 1.3.1- > > 2+deb10u1 with just the bug fix applied, or 1.3.2-1~deb10u1 with a > > "backports-style" changelog containing both 1.3.2-1 and then the > > stable > > update. In either case we would need a debdiff that reflects the > > chosen > > approach. > > > > One thing that will need to be fixed in unstable first either way: > > > > Not built on buildd: arch all binaries uploaded by samueloph > > > > As per the d-d-a announcement, that will need a new source upload > > to > > unstable to resolve, as arch:all can't be usefully binNMUed. > > I just uploaded 1.3.3-1 (source-only) to unstable, can I just wait > until it migrates to testing and then go with "1.3.2-1+deb10u1" ? > If so, I will remove the "moreinfo" tag when it the package migrates > to Testing (in 2 days) and we can use the latest debdiff on this > thread. That doesn't really make sense as a version here, as it's not a stable update on top of 1.3.2-1; stable only has 1.3.1-2. If you really want to go with the complete version rather than just the specific fix, then either 1.3.2-1~deb10u1 - and therefore with the original 1.3.2-1 changelog with a "backports style" entry on top - or 1.3.2-0+deb10u1. Regards, Adam
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Hello Adam, It certainly can't be 1.3.2-1+deb10u1, as that version number is higher > than the package in unstable. Either one would need to go with 1.3.1- > 2+deb10u1 with just the bug fix applied, or 1.3.2-1~deb10u1 with a > "backports-style" changelog containing both 1.3.2-1 and then the stable > update. In either case we would need a debdiff that reflects the chosen > approach. > > One thing that will need to be fixed in unstable first either way: > > Not built on buildd: arch all binaries uploaded by samueloph > > As per the d-d-a announcement, that will need a new source upload to > unstable to resolve, as arch:all can't be usefully binNMUed. > I just uploaded 1.3.3-1 (source-only) to unstable, can I just wait until it migrates to testing and then go with "1.3.2-1+deb10u1" ? If so, I will remove the "moreinfo" tag when it the package migrates to Testing (in 2 days) and we can use the latest debdiff on this thread. Thanks, -- Samuel Henrique
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo On Tue, 2019-08-20 at 00:33 +0100, Samuel Henrique wrote: > Thanks for your help Paul :) > > I'm attaching a debdiff for 1.3.2-1+deb10u1, release team please > advise whether that's acceptable or not (please read discussion on > the bugreport), It certainly can't be 1.3.2-1+deb10u1, as that version number is higher than the package in unstable. Either one would need to go with 1.3.1- 2+deb10u1 with just the bug fix applied, or 1.3.2-1~deb10u1 with a "backports-style" changelog containing both 1.3.2-1 and then the stable update. In either case we would need a debdiff that reflects the chosen approach. One thing that will need to be fixed in unstable first either way: Not built on buildd: arch all binaries uploaded by samueloph As per the d-d-a announcement, that will need a new source upload to unstable to resolve, as arch:all can't be usefully binNMUed. Regards, Adam
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Thanks for your help Paul :) I'm attaching a debdiff for 1.3.2-1+deb10u1, release team please advise whether that's acceptable or not (please read discussion on the bugreport), Regards, -- Samuel Henrique ruby-airbrussh_1.3.2-1+deb10u1.debdiff Description: Binary data
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
retitle 930795 buster-pu: package ruby-airbrussh user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 930795 - unblock usertags 930795 pu tags 930795 buster thanks On 02-07-2019 01:14, Samuel Henrique wrote: > I can see you have lots of work to do, so if you feel like this should > not be fixed for the first Buster release, I will try to address this > with stable-updates, if you think that's acceptable. > > With my maintainer's hat on I say that it's important to fix this before > releasing Buster, and the changes are very trivial, but I do acknowledge > that the best person to make the call here is someone from the release > team, so whatever you say I'm fine with it. The time for unblocks for buster has come and gone. The deadline was last weeks Tuesday, we are now in deep freeze. I propose you prepare a stable release update targeting buster, such that this can be fixed in the first point release. I have updated this bugs metadata to reflect that. Please discuss your proposal with the stable release managers in this bug. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo Hello Paul, Control: tags -1 moreinfo > I removed the moreinfo tag as I assume now you will have enough information to make a judgement call on this one, feel free to tell me if I should not have done so. > > I'm asking for the unblock of ruby-airbrussh > > because a critical bug was solved in the last upload. > > > > The bug is related to the package throwing an exception when dealing > > with non UTF-8 characters coming from SSH. > > Can you elaborate a bit why the severity? (Would have been nice to have > that description in the bug you didn't file). Looking at the upstream > bug, it may just be confusing to the user and ugly of course as rsync > was said to keep on running. Is rsync in Debian broken in the same way? > So, the main problem here is that when using capistrano (a deployment tool), the user will think that the deployment failed because ruby-airbrussh will have problems with non UTF-8 characters coming from SSH`ed rsync. I do not have reasons to think that rsync is broken in the same way, as the main problem here is misguiding the user into thinking that there is something wrong with the deployment. Capistrano is used for production critical pipelines at some companies. In summary, the deployment will probably occur normally, but the only guarantee of that would be the user having to manually debug the error and checking whether it succeeded or not under the hood. > > I decided to upload the latest release instead of patching the previous > > release > > Which still means review work by us. We do have quite some unblocks > coming in this last freeze moment. > I can see you have lots of work to do, so if you feel like this should not be fixed for the first Buster release, I will try to address this with stable-updates, if you think that's acceptable. With my maintainer's hat on I say that it's important to fix this before releasing Buster, and the changes are very trivial, but I do acknowledge that the best person to make the call here is someone from the release team, so whatever you say I'm fine with it. -- Samuel Henrique
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Samuel On 20-06-2019 20:38, Samuel Henrique wrote: > I'm asking for the unblock of ruby-airbrussh > because a critical bug was solved in the last upload. > > The bug is related to the package throwing an exception when dealing > with non UTF-8 characters coming from SSH. Can you elaborate a bit why the severity? (Would have been nice to have that description in the bug you didn't file). Looking at the upstream bug, it may just be confusing to the user and ugly of course as rsync was said to keep on running. Is rsync in Debian broken in the same way? > I decided to upload the latest release instead of patching the previous > release Which still means review work by us. We do have quite some unblocks coming in this last freeze moment. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hello, I'm asking for the unblock of ruby-airbrussh because a critical bug was solved in the last upload. The bug is related to the package throwing an exception when dealing with non UTF-8 characters coming from SSH. I decided to upload the latest release instead of patching the previous release because the only functionality change of the latest release is this one, all the other changes can't possibly affect the package, and in this case it's simpler to have the latest release then to patch it and possibly induce the users to think that this problem is not fixed: * Files changed that fix this problem: - lib/airbrussh/console.rb * Other files changed, not needed to fix the problem, can't break anything and makes the package better: - test/airbrussh/console_test.rb (it's a new test case for this problem) * Other files changed, not needed to fix the problem, can't break anything and does not make any difference on the package: - appveyor.yml - CHANGELOG.md - lib/airbrussh/version.rb - LICENSE.txt - .travis.yml As you can see, all of the files in this case are metadata files. I didn't open a RC bug on BTS because I'm assuming it's not necessary as we already have the upstream one and the fix is already on Unstable. This is the bug that was fixed in this new release: https://github.com/mattbrictson/airbrussh/issues/120 PR + some discussion: https://github.com/mattbrictson/airbrussh/pull/121 Special attention to the fact that the bug was noticed while using capistrano, which depends on this package and was the only reason I packaged it. Thanks, -- Samuel Henrique ruby-airbrussh.debdiff Description: Binary data
