On 10/19/21 10:07 PM, Paul Gevers wrote: > Source: python-novaclient > Version: 2:17.2.1-3 > Severity: serious > Control: close -1 2:17.6.0-2 > Tags: sid bookworm > User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org > Usertags: out-of-sync > Control: block -1 by 986143 > > Dear maintainer(s), > > The Release Team considers packages that are out-of-sync between testing > and unstable for more than 60 days as having a Release Critical bug in > testing [1]. Your package src:python-novaclient has been trying to > migrate for 66 days [2]. Hence, I am filing this bug.
The link you're pointing to says 22 days, not 66 !!! > I'm not sure if the blocking bug is even a bug in bookworm. If I > understand it correctly, the issue reported there was purely for buster > to bullseye upgrades and can be ignored afterwards. FYI, the BTS > considers the bug affecting unstable because the version of the package > in unstable is not a descendant of the fixed version (judged by parsing > the changelog). This looks like a correct analysis. So in fact, the only thing that should be done is fix the BTS entry no? I'm not sure how... > This bug will trigger auto-removal when appropriate. As with all new > bugs, there will be at least 30 days before the package is auto-removed. IMO, that's not what's needed here. What's needed, is to tell the BTS the package is working as expected, and should be migrating. IMO, the bug you're opening is: 1/ not following the rules (because 22 days instead of 60) 2/ unfortunately not very helpful ... But maybe I'm mistaking?!? :) > I have immediately closed this bug with the version in unstable, so if > that version or a later version migrates, this bug will no longer affect > testing. I have also tagged this bug to only affect sid and bookworm, so > it doesn't affect (old-)stable. > > If you believe your package is unable to migrate to testing due to > issues beyond your control, don't hesitate to contact the Release Team. I do not think adding a: Breaks: python3-django-horizon (<< 3:18.6.2) in the current unstable version is the way to go at this point, as this was addressed in Bullseye, as you wrote, which provides the upgrade path already. So what should be done then? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
