[Pkg-rust-maintainers] Updates to the trixie freeze policy

[Cyril Brulebois]

Hi,

Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher at debian.org> (2024-11-02):
> Dear toolchain, debian-installer, and image maintainers,
> 
> We, as the release team, are aware that we are late with the
> announcement of the freeze timeline for trixie. After some internal
> discussions on how we want to handle the freeze for trixie based on
> the lessons learnt from the bookworm release, we like to get your
> feedback on our changes listed below before we announce the freeze
> schedule.

It looks to me “how to avoid burning out coworkers” didn't make it into
“lessons learnt”.

> During the bookworm release we made the following observations:
[…]
> * the work on d-i and images takes time and requires a non-moving set
>   of packages to work on

The last part is not true, and has never been true in the 12+ years I've
been involved.

> We thus propose the following timeline:
> 
> Milestone 1: Toolchain and d-i freeze
> 
> As in bookworm, we start with the freeze of toolchain with the goal to
> stabilize build essential packages and compilers and interpreters of
> major ecosystems (Python, Ruby, Rust, Golang, Haskell, Vala, LLVM). The
> list of packages that is involved can be found at [1].
> 
> In trixie we will also freeze all packages that produce udebs with the
> intent to stabilize the relevant packages for debian-installer and
> debian-boot. Changes to these packages need to be coordinated with the
> respective teams. Effectively, this means that any change to a package
> producing udebs will require an unblock request with an explicit ACK
> from d-i to migrate and we also won't be doing any transitions of udeb
> producing packages.

It looks to me that's going to put more pressure on us, on me, in a
continuous fashion, during the entire freeze. It really looks like
you've entirely ignored what I wrote to the team about burnout.

> udeb producing packages maintained by debian-boot and debian-cd are
> exempt from these rules to facilitate their work. Updates to these
> packages should be prepared at their maintainers' discretion and are
> expected to benefit the development of the installer.

That's always been the case. Thank you for not taking *that* away, I
guess?

> We are happy to receive your feedback - especially on the change
> regarding d-i. The proposed text for the freeze policy can be found in
> the following merge request on salsa:
> 
> https://salsa.debian.org/release-team/release.debian.org/-/merge_requests/27

My favorite course of action is *not* changing anything regarding d-i
(except the fingerpointing I received afterwards, that I really would
have loved to avoid).


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois (kibi at debian.org)            <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-rust-maintainers/attachments/20241102/94072df3/attachment.sig>