[request-tracker-maintainers] RT5 status

[Dominic Hargreaves]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 09:52:19PM +0000, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> Hi all
> 
> It's been a little while since the last update on the list about RT5 
> packages - Andrew and I have been discussing the details offlist - and
> so I figured I should share where we're at.
> 
> For various reaosns this all got a bit late but we are aiming to get
> RT5 in bullseye - it was uploaded to NEW on Tuesday (after some
> contortions around shipping with the all the sources of the javascript
> libraries).

We missed the deadline (request-tracker5 is still in NEW) :( But we'll
make sure to get RT5 into backports which will hopefully be a decent
alternative for people who want RT5 features.

> Given the timescales involved I don't know how sure we can be of RT5
> transitioning in time. We're also planning a round of updates to the
> team maintained extension packages, though this is also of course
> dependent on timings - they will all have to go through NEW too, because
> of the new package names (even if the source package names stay
> the same). Andrew and I are working through the list updating these so
> they are ready to upload at the right moments.

Our plan has been adapted now and our list of packages and work items is at 

<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17WvGt5oedk2qsekJbPl-CLyhrs8FIaFDobinMMMP5p8/edit?usp=sharing>

Apologies for the non-free tools, if anyone knows of a Free solution
that allows a tabular format to be maintained with live updates, let us
know! Anyone who would like to work on RT packaging is of course
welcome to have write access to the spreadsheet if they have a Google
account.

> At this stage we haven't made a final decision about whether RT4 should
> ship in bullseye if RT5 makes it in. On the one hand, RT5 is still fairly
> new and it's possible some users would prefer to be able to use RT4 for
> a bit longer. On the other hand, there's no certainty that we will have
> upstream support for RT4 for the lifecycle of bullseye.
> 
> If it does stay in, it'll need some work too:
> 
> 1) we're aiming to switch gnupg1 for gnupg2 so we remove ourselves as
> the last blocker to removing the former from Debian
> 2) RT4 also needs the above contortions to fix its DFSG requirements

These have been done and hit testing.