Hey,

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 2:16 AM Paul Gevers <elb...@debian.org> wrote:

> Control: tags -1 moreinfo
>
> Hi Utkarsh,
>
> On 27-03-2019 14:30, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> > Please unblock package ruby-globalid.
> >
> > Recently, there was a bug (#925178) reported against the package with
> > severity: important.
>
> Did you see my last note in that bug?
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=925178#21


Apologies. I didn't see it earlier :(
Answering below.

Care to answer it here?
> '''
> On 24-03-2019 07:21, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> >  ruby-globalid (0.4.2-1) unstable; urgency=medium
> >  .
> >    * Team upload
> >    * New upstream version 0.4.2
> >    * Add patch to fix regression (Closes: #925178)
> >    * Drop patches that are merged in upstream
> >    * Bump debhelper compatibility level to 11
> >    * Bump Standards-Version to 4.3.0 (no changes needed)
> >    * Fix insecure URL
>
> Thanks for the quick fix for this issue. However, due to the new
> upstream version and the debhelper compatibility bump this version is
> not eligible [1] for an unblock for buster.
>
> Did rails 2:5.2.2.1+dfsg-1 break ruby-globalid or did it only break the
> autopkgtest of it? I'm asking because this version of rails is fixing a
> CVE's which we want in buster, but the autopkgtest failure (and the
> freeze) is blocking it.
>

It was breaking just the autopkgtest, thus the regression.
Everything else was fine.

Paul
>
> [1] https://release.debian.org/buster/freeze_policy.html
> '''
>
> > The package was in testing and the bug was reported on 20th March and
> > was resolved in the latest upload, which was on 24th March.
> > This also causes regression in the migration of rails' latest update.
> >
> > Hence, request you to:
> >
> > unblock ruby-globalid/0.4.2-1
>
> Not likely in the current state.
>

ruby-activejob from rails is the only reverse dependency of ruby-globalid.
Since the package is in good shape now, perhaps could be given an exception?
And it won't be risky either since ruby-activejob is the only rev-dep :)
Also, it was an RC bug at the last moment (though I understand the scenario
here) :(

Paul
>


Best,
Utkarsh

Reply via email to