[Debian-med-packaging] Bug#1063023: consider choosing experimental for breaking changes as per semver.org

[Praveen Arimbrathodiyil]

Package: routine-update
Version: 0.1.5
Severity: wishlist

I think targeting experimental for breaking changes is a safer default 
than picking unstable by default.

As per semver.org, for libraries without a public API, ie, version < 
1.0, even minor updates can be breaking - even if it does not actually 
break, most reverse dependencies declare a stricter dependency. Patch 
updates are usually allowed when declaring dependency relations.

For example in ruby/Gemfile, we usually have

~> 2.0 (stable public API) vs ~> 0.9.0 (no stable API).

At least for library packages (this can packages starting with lib, 
ruby-, python*- etc) we should do this by default.

For other packages also this might still be a safer choice.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0x8F53E0193B294B75.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 4938 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP public key
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/debian-med-packaging/attachments/20240204/c04e1fff/attachment-0001.key>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/debian-med-packaging/attachments/20240204/c04e1fff/attachment-0001.sig>