On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 08:57:50AM +0200, Andrius Merkys wrote: > On 2024-02-02 19:46, Steve Langasek wrote: > > If there is no new version in experimental, or there is a new version BUT > > the patch against unstable applies cleanly to the version in experimental > > (no fuzz), we upload to experimental.
> > Otherwise, patches are sent to the BTS but we skip uploading to experimental > > and will NMU directly to unstable at the next stage (handling binary NEW > > there). > Given libfoo1 in unstable and libfoo2 in experimental, I assume libfoo1t64 > will be NMU'd directly to unstable. After that happens, will it be OK to > upload libfoo2 to unstable (as part of libfoo transition), or will it have > to carry t64 suffix, i.e., libfoo2t64? In my view, it's fine then to upload libfoo2 to unstable without the t64 suffix as ABI compatibility with experimental is not really required. In fact, none of the t64 binaries currently being uploaded to experimental have the final ABI either, we're just using experimental to clear binary NEW. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
