On 21/11/2025 23:46, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: Hi Nicholas,
> The problem as I see it is upstream keeps breaking existing user configs > (see https://bugs.debian.org/1099802), and backups that aren't painless > and automatic have a tendency to not be updated... As a system administrator I'd prefer it if maintainer scripts didn't create potentially junk files on every upgrade, especially since there is no way to opt-out of their execution. I've successfully self-managed my configs since I started using borgmatic (years ago), and don't recall a case when an intervention was needed because backups stopped working. > > That said, does rewriting, updating, and implicitly checking/validating > a config on upgrade violate the principle of least surprise more than > this: > > a) > 1. Provide a rewritten & valid $n.dpkg-dist for each config file on > each upgrade. > 2. In Debian.NEWS, when there are breaking changes, point the user to > this file. > -- hopefully errors with obsolete and invalid config when users ignore > D.NEWS...and users are provided with a template generated by their > site-specific config > > vs > > b) (My WIP POC) > 1. Back up each config file to $n.dpkg-old and rewrite /e/borgmatic/$n > 2. In Debian.NEWS, when there are breaking changes, remind the user. > that dpkg-old exists in case the auto-migrated config missed > something. > -- hopefully doesn't miss source data due to dropped obsolete and > invalid config when users ignore D.NEWS. > > c) > 1. Back up each config file to $n.dpkg-old and rewrite > /e/borgmatic/$n, and stop bothering use with Debian.NEWS (this assumes > that upstream migration tool isn't buggy) > 2. Stop bothering the user and interrupting upgrades > -- hopefully doesn't miss source data due to dropped obsolete and > invalid config; assumes users tend to ignore D.NEWS. > > d) > 1. Continue shipping D.NEWS, when needed, and do nothing more > -- NEWS interrupts upgrade, but users will ignore NEWS, users have > broken config (hopefully errors...)> > What do you think is the least bad option? I initially chose "b" > because I was optimistic and chose to have faith in upstream and their > migration tool. If a user ignores NEWS, then an automatically upgraded config file (as in a) won't help because the user won't know about it. b) and c) are both problematic (c more so) because bugs can and do happen. Moreover, automatic config upgrade has already proved clunky as per #1121514. Therefore I prefer d). Not ignoring NEWS is the user's responsibility, as is making sure critical services (such as backup) are still working after a software update. > > Regards, > Nicholas Regards, Simon
