Hi Security Team, On 05/06/2020 09:23, Sylvain Beucler wrote: > On 04/06/2020 20:41, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: >> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 07:47:56PM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: >>> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 10:22:50AM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote: >>>> Hi Security Team, >>>> >>>> What is your view on updating mysql-connector-java 5.1.42->5.1.49 for >>>> Stretch? >>> >>> We can update to 5.1.49, yes. We've had to update it to new 5.1.x >>> releases in the past and I don't remember any issues. The fact >>> that there's zero information totally sucks, but there's nothing >>> we can do either (apart from removing it as we did a year ago). >>> >>> Looking at the debdiff from >>> https://www.beuc.net/tmp/debian-lts/mysql-connector-java/ >>> the remaining change would be to change the version number to >>> 5.1.49-1~deb9u1 and the targets distro to stretch-security. >> >> I'm a bit late to the party, but just want to give my 2 cents on the >> versioning scheme. Agreed here to not use the really-something >> variant. usually I think this is usefull when you have rebased >> soemthing to a *higher* version, but need to rollback. Example: >> >> graphicsmagick/1.4+really1.3.35+hg16296-1 >> >> or >> >> lxc/1:3.1.0+really3.0.4-3 >> >> (other examples exists) > > OK. I had used +really for the ELTS package to test what I should do in > the event that there would be objections or major delays in bumping to > 5.1.49 in other suites, like e.g.: > https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/tomcat7 > 7.0.56-3+really7.0.100-1+deb8u1 < 7.0.75-1 > > >> So I think the proper version would be either what Moritz said, >> 5.1.49-1~deb9u1 or 5.1.49-*0*+deb9u1. >> >> For practical reasons there is no difference, both work. usually it >> just more points out what the upload does. 5.1.49-1~deb9u1 would give >> more a hint like "this update is rebuild of 5.1.49-1 for stretch, >> possibly minus/plus some additional changes". 5.1.49-0+deb9u1 (please >> not the 0, not -1+deb9u1) means more something like "we imported >> upstream 5.1.49 on top of the current packaging plus/minus probably >> some additional changes". >> >> Personally I would go with 5.1.49-0+deb9u1 due to the meaning, there >> are other source packages which follow this schema. Other do with the >> ~debXuY variant. For both in any case we have 5.1.49-0+deb9u1 <= >> 5.1.49-1 and 5.1.49-1~deb9u1 <= 5.1.49-1. >> >> And as usual there are as well excpetions. >> >> Anyway, I would suggest to not use the +really syntax. > > Certainly. I recently prepared a package with 5.1.49-1~deb9u1 (and I'm > currently doing further testing) but I'll switch to 5.1.49-0+deb9u1 > since there is no 5.1.49-1.
I finished testing and I prepared the upload accordingly: https://www.beuc.net/tmp/debian-lts/mysql-connector-java/mysql-connector-java_5.1.49-0+deb9u1_amd64.changes https://www.beuc.net/tmp/debian-lts/mysql-connector-java/debdiff-stretch.txt Version scheme is changed, suite is stretch-security, and I made a minor change to debian/watch to track 5.x (not 8.x). Do you approve for upload? Cheers! Sylvain