[Pkg-erlang-devel] Bug#958841: Bug#959505: release.debian.org: Is erlang autoremoval is necessary?

[Paul Gevers]

Hi,

tl;dr I'll remove elixir-lang from testing in 15 days if the elixir-lang
issue isn't by then.

On 03-05-2020 12:07, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>> It's not a desirable output here. This means that without some changes
>> in elixir-lang
>> new erlang packages will never reach testing.

Well, that exactly what was intended. Because erlang breaks the version
of elixir-lang in testing.

>> I'm not sure that an unmaintained
>> package should stall development of its reverse dependencies like that.

Stalling isn't what's supposed to happen. But we want to give the
maintainer some time. That's exactly what the timer in autoremovals
tries to do. (Bugs in the bts are unlucky in this case, it's good that
you contacted us).

> Alright, then I recommend this:
>     reassign 958841 src:erlang 1:22.3.2+dfsg-1
>     clone 958841 -1
>     reassign -1 src:elixir-lang 1.9.1.dfsg-1.3
>     retitle -1 elixir-lang: incompatible with erlang 22
>     # consider also leaving a longer message somewhere…?
>     close 958841 1:22.3.3+dfsg-1
> 
> Doing that should live a RC bug in elixir-lang, and cause its autorm in
> a while, and leave erlang where it is, letting it migrate to testing as
> soon as elixir-lang is out.  The rm from testing of elixir-lang could be
> expedited if nothing happens.

I agree with this approach. It leaves the maintainers of elixir-lang
some time to fix the situation. If they don't fix it, it will be removed
and erlang can migrate. Unless there is some issue that I am not aware
of that warrants a faster migration (and hence removal of elixir-lang).

>>> Lastly, I recommend you just don't spend too much time on understanding
>>> the autorm situation, rather just fix whatever is broken and make
>>> elixir-lang pass the autopkgtest again; the autorm date is more than a
>>> month away after all.
>>
>> I would say that binNMU would be sufficient for now, but I wouldn't like to
>> constantly monitor this elixir-lang situation.
> 
> ACK, if really that package is unmaintained it's probably best to not do
> anything even if a simple binNMU was enough.  Or we could just try it
> and wait till the next breakage before removing elixir-lang from
> testing.
> 
> I'm not sure I'd call a package "unmaintained" when the last maintainer
> upload was last September, so perhaps I'd still try to give it another
> chance by binNMUing it.

Given the issue as I understand it, I don't want to binNMU it. I think
the binNMU'd package can migrate before erlang and then the package in
testing is broken (until erlang migrates) which isn't cool. The package
needs to be removed or fixed before erlang can migrate. Again, unless
there are urgent matters, I want to give elixir-lang maintainers some
time. Please contact us in this bug if the situation isn't fixed in 15 days.

Paul

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-erlang-devel/attachments/20200503/73ef5bc3/attachment.sig>