Hi, On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 12:07:52AM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > On Sat, 29 Apr 2023 16:32:23 +0100 Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> > wrote: > > > > MR: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/dash/-/merge_requests/19 > > > > I think we should ship these changes in bookworm. Why? > > > > - we get diversion-less essential package set already in bookworm > > - we get diversion-less uber-essential dash already in bookworm > > - we get maintainer-script free uber-essential dash in trixie > > - in case we need to go down the canonicalization-by-dh forced > > migration path in trixie to lift the moratorium on moving files, we > > don't have /bin/sh diversions as a blocker and the path remains open > > > > Yes, I realize it is late, and I wish I had come across this ticket > > some months ago. But we still have time, and the benefits are great > :-) > > Alright, this is now in experimental (thanks Andrej), please help with > testing if you can!
Let me record this in email: * I am the primary author of these changes and still think we should perform them at a convenient time. * As far as I understand it, the main motivation from Luca is improving the /usr-merge transition. * Given that dash is one of the rare cases diverting files from itself rather than from other packages, I think that the benefit to the /usr-merge transition of doing this before bookworm is minor. Removing other kinds of unnecessary diversions would be more useful to the transition. * I think these changes are not in line with the freeze policy. * For these reasons, I recommend not trying to ship them in bookworm (despite removing unnecessary diversions being a good thing in general). * Breakage can happen in unexpected places (e.g. DPKG_ROOT, which is the origin of my work on this). * If you proceed in bookworm anyway, I expect you to own any kind of breakage that results from this (including DPKG_ROOT breakage). And with this, I'll leave it up to you until bookworm is released. Helmut