Dear all, We think we might have a consensus on the following resolution text. We could be wrong, as the judgement of consensus has been made by just a few of us. We agreed in our meeting today that I'll start a vote a week from today unless a ctte member asks for a delay. Thus, we expect to close this bug approximately two weeks from today.
Many thanks to Simon for a previous draft of this text. ~=~=~=~=~ 1. Offer advice: The debianutils package must continue to provide the which(1) program until a compatible utility is available in a package that is at least transitively essential in Debian 12. For the Debian 12 release, we expect which(1) to be in either an Essential package or a transitively Essential package (that is, a package that is depended on by an Essential package). 2. Overrule maintainer of debianutils: The which(1) program must not print any deprecation warnings. 3. Decline to overrule maintainer regarding use of alternatives: If another package takes over responsibility for which(1), then the debianutils maintainers and the other package's maintainers should coordinate to choose a suitable mechanism, which might be either versioned Depends/Breaks/Replaces, dpkg-divert, alternatives or something else. 4. Overrule maintainer of debianutils: The debianutils package must continue to provide the tempfile(1) program until a compatible utility is available in a package that is at least transitively essential in Debian 12. For the Debian 12 release, we expect tempfile(1) to be in either an Essential package or a transitively Essential package. 5. Overrule maintainer of debianutils: Programs in debianutils must not be moved to /usr until we have a project-wide consensus on going ahead with such a move, and any programs that have already been moved must be moved back. In particular, this means debianutils must contain /bin/run-parts and /sbin/installkernel for the time being. ~=~=~=~=~ -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature