Bug#982949: Please allow libvirt-python 7.0.0 into bullseye
Hi Paul, On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:55:14PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi Bernd, > > On 17-02-2021 22:30, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-02-17 at 18:37 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > >> libvirt-python is a key package. > > > > and it should match libvirt. Having libvirt-python 6.x and libvirt 7.0 > > is (imho, ymmv...) much worse than an completely (from us) untested > > libvirt-python. > > I understood from the request that it's an option to patch 6.x. Because, > if Guido believes it really should match, than why did he file an > unblock request? We're only in the soft freeze right now, only *new* I don't think I marked it as unblock request. I used "allow" here to indicate that i'm not entirely sure if the scope is still o.k. Sorry if it was confusing. > packages are blocked and we age packages a bit more, so technically > there's nothing to unblock at this moment. Currently it's still the > maintainers call what's right for bullseye. We, as the release team, ask > for targeted fixes. If you consider this out-of-sync to be an issue of > its' own, than please, align with Guido and I have good faith that > you'll do the best in Debian interest, keeping our guidelines in the > freeze policy [1] into account. I suggest to really not wait to long, Uploaded now. Cheers, -- Guido > because after the hard freeze starts, this indeed requires an unblock > from us. If the package (whichever option you choose) can migrate before > that, that would be great. > > Paul > > [1] https://release.debian.org/bullseye/freeze_policy.html#soft >
Bug#982949: Please allow libvirt-python 7.0.0 into bullseye
Hi Bernd, On 17-02-2021 22:30, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > On Wed, 2021-02-17 at 18:37 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: >> libvirt-python is a key package. > > and it should match libvirt. Having libvirt-python 6.x and libvirt 7.0 > is (imho, ymmv...) much worse than an completely (from us) untested > libvirt-python. I understood from the request that it's an option to patch 6.x. Because, if Guido believes it really should match, than why did he file an unblock request? We're only in the soft freeze right now, only *new* packages are blocked and we age packages a bit more, so technically there's nothing to unblock at this moment. Currently it's still the maintainers call what's right for bullseye. We, as the release team, ask for targeted fixes. If you consider this out-of-sync to be an issue of its' own, than please, align with Guido and I have good faith that you'll do the best in Debian interest, keeping our guidelines in the freeze policy [1] into account. I suggest to really not wait to long, because after the hard freeze starts, this indeed requires an unblock from us. If the package (whichever option you choose) can migrate before that, that would be great. Paul [1] https://release.debian.org/bullseye/freeze_policy.html#soft OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#982949: Please allow libvirt-python 7.0.0 into bullseye
Hi Paul, On Wed, 2021-02-17 at 18:37 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > libvirt-python is a key package. and it should match libvirt. Having libvirt-python 6.x and libvirt 7.0 is (imho, ymmv...) much worse than an completely (from us) untested libvirt-python. Thanks, Bernd -- Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F
Bug#982949: Please allow libvirt-python 7.0.0 into bullseye
Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Guido, On 17-02-2021 08:50, Guido Günther wrote: > #982695 made me aware i totally forgot to update libvirt-python with > recent libvirt before the freeze, hence the build failure. I've > prepared 7.0.0-1 in experimental a couple of days ago and it would be > great to have that version in bullseye since it matches the libvirt > version. The diff is a bit larger due to the introduction of type hints > etc upstream > >http://honk.sigxcpu.org/tmp/7.0.0-1.diff > > Would that be o.k. to upload to sid to fix #982695? Otherwise I'll look > at fixing just the build failure on top of 6.1.0-1. libvirt-python is a key package. Please fix this without a new upstream release unless you can explain that it's a targeted fix. It doesn't look like that though from the version number. Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#982949: Please allow libvirt-python 7.0.0 into bullseye
Package: release.debian.org Severity: wishlist Hi, #982695 made me aware i totally forgot to update libvirt-python with recent libvirt before the freeze, hence the build failure. I've prepared 7.0.0-1 in experimental a couple of days ago and it would be great to have that version in bullseye since it matches the libvirt version. The diff is a bit larger due to the introduction of type hints etc upstream http://honk.sigxcpu.org/tmp/7.0.0-1.diff Would that be o.k. to upload to sid to fix #982695? Otherwise I'll look at fixing just the build failure on top of 6.1.0-1. Cheers, -- Guido -- System Information: Debian Release: bullseye/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'testing-debug'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386, armhf, arm64 Kernel: Linux 5.10.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU threads) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled
