Hi,
On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 6:14 PM Sebastian Ramacher <sramac...@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Aron,
>
> On 2024-09-08 11:34:48 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> > Control: tags -1 moreinfo
> >
> > Hi Aron
> >
> > On 2024-08-31 14:54:57 +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
> > > Package: release.debian.org
> > > Severity: normal
> > > User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org
> > > Usertags: transition
> > > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-xml-sgml-p...@lists.alioth.debian.org,
> > > a...@debian.org, libx...@packages.debian.org
> > > Control: affects -1 + src:libxml2
> > >
> > > Dear Release Managers:
> > >
> > > I'd like to request a transition slot to upload libxml2 for unstable
> > > and start this transition.
> > >
> > > libxml2 upstream has introduced some breaking changes to libxml2's ABI
> > > , but upstream has concerns about bumping SONAME at the moment[1]. As
> > > discussed previously through mails[2] and IRC, I'd like to do a
> > > transition by renaming the binary package from libxml2 to libxml2n
> > > (the letter "n" is randomly picked) without changing the library
> > > SONAME.Since there are a few hundreds of direct reverse deps of
> > > libxml2 in Debian, an entry of "Provides: libxml2 (=
> > > ${source:Version})" is added to avoid breaking the archive heavily
> > > during the transition. It will be removed after the transition has
> > > completed and reverse dependencies have migrated to depend on the new
> > > package name.
> >
> > Since upstream hasn't made up their mind yet, I think it is preferable
> > to revert the version in unstable to the last known good version. From
> > my understanding that is 2.9.14. We can then revisit this transition
> > when upstream decided how to continue or the transition freeze for
> > trixie comes close.
>
> Any thoughts on that? If not, I will prepare an upload at the end of
> this week so that we can get libxml2 unstuck and can work towards a
> workable testing for riscv64.
>
Please go ahead, I'm still heavily stuck in recent $dayjob stuff...
Thanks,
Aron
