Hi, On 20-10-2021 02:07, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> 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 !!!
But I didn't say the last version was trying to migrate for 66 days. What I (try to) say is that you package has been out of sync for so long. >> 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... Tell the BTS that the version in unstable is also fixed: https://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control > 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) I don't agree, your package *is* out of sync for so long. > 2/ unfortunately not very helpful ... I consider it the task of the maintainer to ensure his package migrates. That was what I tried to convey. In this case I spotted the likely root cause and I hope I taught you something in the process such that future uploads don't suffer from this. > But maybe I'm mistaking?!? :) What I suspect is we're just looking at the issue from different angles and may not have the same idea on the best way forward. Luckily it doesn't matter much as both of us can easily fix the issue. We just have different incentives. > 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? As said, tell the BTS that the version in unstable is fixed. Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
