Bug#996863: src:python-novaclient: fails to migrate to testing for too long: unresolved RC bug
On 10/20/21 8:06 AM, Paul Gevers wrote: >>> 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 Thanks for confirming it, as I wasn't sure. >> 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. Oh ok. Though you pointed at the excuse page which showed 22 days, which was kind of confusing then... :) >> 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. Thanks for it, as it hopefully triggered the right fix. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Bug#996863: src:python-novaclient: fails to migrate to testing for too long: unresolved RC bug
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
Bug#996863: src:python-novaclient: fails to migrate to testing for too long: unresolved RC bug
On 10/19/21 10:07 PM, Paul Gevers wrote: > Source: python-novaclient > Version: 2:17.2.1-3 > Severity: serious > Control: close -1 2:17.6.0-2 > Tags: sid bookworm > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: out-of-sync > Control: block -1 by 986143 > > Dear maintainer(s), > > 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 !!! > 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... > This bug will trigger auto-removal when appropriate. As with all new > bugs, there will be at least 30 days before the package is auto-removed. 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) 2/ unfortunately not very helpful ... But maybe I'm mistaking?!? :) > I have immediately closed this bug with the version in unstable, so if > that version or a later version migrates, this bug will no longer affect > testing. I have also tagged this bug to only affect sid and bookworm, so > it doesn't affect (old-)stable. > > If you believe your package is unable to migrate to testing due to > issues beyond your control, don't hesitate to contact the Release Team. I do not think adding a: Breaks: python3-django-horizon (<< 3:18.6.2) 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? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Bug#996863: src:python-novaclient: fails to migrate to testing for too long: unresolved RC bug
Source: python-novaclient Version: 2:17.2.1-3 Severity: serious Control: close -1 2:17.6.0-2 Tags: sid bookworm User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: out-of-sync Control: block -1 by 986143 Dear maintainer(s), 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. 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). If a package is out of sync between unstable and testing for a longer period, this usually means that bugs in the package in testing cannot be fixed via unstable. Additionally, blocked packages can have impact on other packages, which makes preparing for the release more difficult. Finally, it often exposes issues with the package and/or its (reverse-)dependencies. We expect maintainers to fix issues that hamper the migration of their package in a timely manner. This bug will trigger auto-removal when appropriate. As with all new bugs, there will be at least 30 days before the package is auto-removed. I have immediately closed this bug with the version in unstable, so if that version or a later version migrates, this bug will no longer affect testing. I have also tagged this bug to only affect sid and bookworm, so it doesn't affect (old-)stable. If you believe your package is unable to migrate to testing due to issues beyond your control, don't hesitate to contact the Release Team. Paul [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2020/02/msg5.html [2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=python-novaclient OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
