Le 2024-04-07 à 06 h 41, Jonathan Wiltshire a écrit :
On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 10:50:39AM -0500, Jérôme Charaoui wrote:
I had an exchange with a fellow DD about this update and uploading this to
bookworm-backports was suggested as a possible alternative considering the
large size of the .debdiff :
olasd | lavamind: in terms of policy, a backport would be allowed (it's a
new upstream release, it's in testing, and you seem to be using the package,
so you might as well upload it to bpo); That still leaves a buggy package in
bookworm, if the bookworm package has never worked, pulling in the newer
upstream release into a stable update may be deemed acceptable by the SRMs;
looking at the upstream changelog of libapache2-mod-qos, the changes for
compatibility with pcre2 (which is what our apache2 now builds against,
since 2.4.52-2) have been introduced in libapache2-mod-qos upstream 11.73.
Backporting the pcre2 support to the libapache2-mod-qos version in bookworm
isn't a very sensible option IMO, in terms of maintainability
If SRMs agree with this assessement, I can close this bug and prepare and
upload to bookworm-backports instead.
It's one sensible path forward and it gives you more flexibility, but it
leaves a gap for users upgrading from bullseye.
Long term, is a new maintainer forthcoming? The orphan bug doesn't seem to
have any interest since being opened in 2019 and there weren't any uploads
at all until last year. Maybe its future should be considered first and
then that will inform the decision about how to handle stable.
I don't think I can personnally adopt this package considering my
packaging Debian work-load at the moment. I also noticed a dozen or so
other Apache modules are also orphaned at the moment and in need of a
new maintainer, so it seems like the issue might be even a little wider
than just this single package.
I'll go ahead with uploading a backport, it will at least provide an
upgrade path option for users, even if a manual one.
Thanks,
-- Jérôme
