Hi Noah,Sorry taking so long to reply. I assumed because you filed a transition bug that there was a regular SONAME bump involved. I see that the dovecot-core ships libraries, but it looks like they didn't bump SONAME. So how is this supposed to work in the dovecot ecosystem? Isn't the package name supposed to change when SONAMEs change (Debian policy) and isn't ABI breaking (which is implied by the transition request and suggested by your Provides) not a reason to bump SONAME? As this is a unconventional transition, I'm not comfortable to judge.
I'm unhappy with removing dovecot-antispam [1] so late for a transition especially as I don't see a warning to its maintainers/users [2]. The unconventional library handling (via the dovecot-abi-*.abiv* Provides from dovecot-core IIUC) makes me want to defer to Release Team member colleagues who handle much more transitions than I do.
Paul[1] popcon suggest > 5% of dovecot installs use it, if we remove it I guess it's worth documenting in release-notes [2] I think it would have been nice to its maintainer and potential users that look at the BTS if you would have filed a bug report against dovecot-antispam once you learned it wasn't compatible. Can you please do so ASAP regardless of how we handle this transition/unblock request?
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
