Hi,
On 05/06/2025 12:19, Timo Röhling wrote:
* Ian Jackson [2025-06-03 16:36]:
I still get the feeling that any exercise of governance or oversight
is Debian is widely regarded as cataclysmic. I have been criticised
here and in #1107137, as if my requests were unreasonable or obviously
beyond
On 2025-06-05 13:30:21 +0200, Timo Röhling wrote:
> * Ian Jackson [2025-06-03 16:36]:
> > It appears that dpkg is now going to be fixed, albeit with a bunch of
> > unpleasantness in the documentation, and only for forky.
> > [...]
> > I still think it would have been good to have this fixed in tri
On Thu, 2025-06-05 at 13:30:21 +0200, Timo Röhling wrote:
> Guillem, would you be willing to backport the change to trixie or
> consent to an NMU?
No. The required changes are too intrusive, add new strings to
translate, add new interfaces, and deprecate others with warnings.
Guillem
* Ian Jackson [2025-06-03 16:36]:
It appears that dpkg is now going to be fixed, albeit with a bunch of
unpleasantness in the documentation, and only for forky.
[...]
I still think it would have been good to have this fixed in trixie.
The original one-line revert would have been very low risk fr
Hello Ian,
* Ian Jackson [2025-06-03 16:36]:
I still get the feeling that any exercise of governance or oversight
is Debian is widely regarded as cataclysmic. I have been criticised
here and in #1107137, as if my requests were unreasonable or obviously
beyond the pale. This is very uncomforta
Bastian Blank writes ("Re: Bug#1106402: dpkg-source, native source package
format with non-native version"):
> I'd like to take over this request then. We have also the policy
> proposal of #1049406 open, which will make secure boot package building
> impossible in Deb
On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 04:36:28PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> However, I doubt the TC will want to try to clear a path through the
> nontechnical obstacles between this improvement and trixie. So, to be
> clear, I'm withdrawing my request for the TC to authorise an NMU,
> or to express any opinio
Hi everyone.
Please see:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=737634#117
It appears that dpkg is now going to be fixed, albeit with a bunch of
unpleasantness in the documentation, and only for forky.
Meanwhile, the dpkg maintainer filed a bug against policy, #1107137.
That report
Hi Sam and Ian,
thank you for your replies!
* Sam Hartman [2025-06-02 11:44]:
My reading of the TC's decision is that the TC supported the claim that
a native package with a non-native version number was not a bug--thus
not a policy violation.
Like Ian, I do not wish to see the underlying tec
> "Timo" == Timo Röhling writes:
Timo> Guillem argues in the original bug that the versioning scheme
Timo> is an important part of the distinction between native and
Timo> non-native packages and explicitly encoded as such in Debian
Timo> Policy.
Several of us argued both bac
Hi, thanks.
Timo Röhling writes ("Re: dpkg-source, native source package format with
non-native version"):
> Dimitri argues that the native package format is useful even for
> non-native packages
...
> If I have mispresented or omitted important facts, please do not
> hesitate to correct me.
I
Control: owner -1 !
Control: tags -1 + confirmed
Hi,
as per
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/tech-ctte/-/blob/master/procedures/moderation.md
I am assuming the moderator role for this TC bug.
I'm going to summarize the state of this bug and the original bug
against dpkg as I have read up on it:
On 2025-05-27 20:48:30 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Sebastian Ramacher writes ("Re: Bug#1106402: dpkg-source, native source
> package format with non-native version"):
> > NACK, it's way too late into the freeze. Toolchain freeze (which dpkg
> > belongs to) star
Matthew Vernon writes ("Re: Bug#1106402: dpkg-source, native source package
format with non-native version"):
> I think Ian is right that we could declare as he wishes under 6.1.1 that:
>
>dpkg-source should be able to build "3.0 (native)" source packages
&
Sebastian Ramacher writes ("Re: Bug#1106402: dpkg-source, native source package
format with non-native version"):
> NACK, it's way too late into the freeze. Toolchain freeze (which dpkg
> belongs to) started on 2025-03-15.
Of course the final decision is with the Release Tea
On 2025-05-27 19:44:52 +0100, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For reference, the resolution in #1007717 was:
>
> """
> Therefore, using its powers
> under constitution 6.1.5, the Technical Committee issues the following
> advice:
>
> 1. It is not a bug of any severity for a package with a non-
Hi,
For reference, the resolution in #1007717 was:
"""
Therefore, using its powers
under constitution 6.1.5, the Technical Committee issues the following
advice:
1. It is not a bug of any severity for a package with a non-native
version number to use a native source package format.
2.
> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
Ian> I would like the Technical Committee to explicitly use its
Ian> power in Constitution 6.1 (1) "Decide on any matter of
Ian> technical policy" to decide that:
Ian, thanks so much for pushing this forward.
I support Ian's request, his reasoning
Package: tech-ctte
Control: tags 737634 patch
Control: block 737634 by -1
Hi.
I would like the Technical Committee to explicitly use its power in
Constitution 6.1 (1) "Decide on any matter of technical policy"
to decide that:
dpkg-source should be able to build "3.0 (native)" source packages
19 matches
Mail list logo
