Bug#1096377: blis: diff for NMU version 1.1-2.1

[Adrian Bunk]

On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 09:57:17PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2025 at 06:19:33PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Control: tags 1096377 + patch
> > Control: tags 1096377 + pending
> > 
> > Dear maintainer,
> > 
> > I've prepared an NMU for blis (versioned as 1.1-2.1) and uploaded
> > it to DELAYED/2. Please feel free to tell me if I should cancel it.
> 
> Ok, I have made a team upload based on that. Thanks for your work.
> 
> However, there were unreleased changes in salsa that your NMU would
> have erased. Had your NMU reached the archive, we would have to revert
> those changes in salsa to keep history consistent.

That's not true.

Similar to a MR you could make a commit based on the previous upload, 
and then merge this into your branch.

I don't consider it my problem how your workflow and tooling handles NMUs,
but there is no fundamental reason why it couldn't handle them smoothly.

> So please use DELAYED/7 or DELAYED/14, such a short timeframe
> (DELAYED/2) to double-check changes in a NMU is not welcome.

I use DELAYED/14 or DELAYED/15 when the package is still in testing.

But when I am trying to fix a 3 digit number of packages back into 
testing, then I'm not waiting a week for seeing whether builds and
autopkgtests are fine.

The Developer's Reference recommends even to upload without delay:

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#when-and-how-to-do-an-nmu
...
Here are some recommended values to use for delays:
  Upload fixing only release-critical bugs older than 7 days, with no 
  maintainer activity on the bug for 7 days and no indication that a fix 
  is in progress: 0 days
...

> Thanks.

cu
Adrian