[Pkg-rust-maintainers] Getting rid of the NEW step for binaries ?

[Thorsten Alteholz]

Hi Sylvestre,

On Thu, 17 Oct 2019, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Because it is the way it is managed in Rust packages. This is done to express 
> what the package provides. For now, it has been working very well.

I need to object here. The process "introduces some unnecessary latency 
and frustration". This does sound more like something working, but with 
lots of room for improvements.

> But this isn't an issue specific to Rust. Having to go through NEW when 
> it is the same source (...)

I have no numbers at hand, but I got the impression that most rust 
packages still have a changelog entry like "new upstream release" when 
they enter NEW.

>>  From looking at the package with the insane large Provides field, it
>> seems like it creates empty binary packages to avoid some dependencies
>> on other development packages to safe ~50k of downloads?  I would
>> suggest to just accept the 50k extra downloads for packages for people
>> using the rust development packages rather than creating extra binary
>> packages.
>
> Sure but this isn't directly related to this discussion. I also do agree that 
> we should address this issue.

NEW existed before rust and you created a tooling that sends packages 
frequently through NEW. From my point of view there is a relation.

Anyway, having a whitelist for packages like the kernel or probably gcc 
totally makes sense. But I am not really convinced that rust packages 
should be on it as well.

   Thorsten