Re: Bug#923091: That merged-usr is mandatory is RC

[Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org>]

On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 07:22:08AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "Ian" == Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> 
>     Ian> (sending this because I got the release team address wrong) Ian
>     Ian> Jackson writes ("That merged-usr is mandatory is RC"):
>     >> In #923091, Guillem (with dpkg maintainer hat on) asks for a
>     >> base-installer option to allow installing buster without
>     >> merged-usr.
>     >> 
>     >> Guillem filed the bug as `wishlist' but given the controversy it
>     >> seems to me that it should be RC if for no other reasons than
>     >> social cohesion.
>     >> 
>     >> CCing the TC FYI (they have already been involved in merged-usr
>     >> debates via #914897) and the release team, in case they have an
>     >> opinion.  FAOD I am not a maintainer of base-files but AFAICT the
>     >> base-files maintainer has not expressed an opinion about
>     >> severity.
> 
> I've been debating doing this, but continue to believe that it's
> important after several days of pondering.  So, per constitution 5.1
> (2), I'd like to explicitly lend support to the idea that it would be
> really good if we provide our users a way to install buster without
> merged /usr.  I think that if we do not do so now, we need to be open to
> the possibility that if users are stymied in doing their work, we will
> need to do so in a buster point release even if we would not normally
> add something some might consider a feature in a point release.
> 
> I'm not speaking to whether I think it should be RC or even whether an
> expert only option is good enough.
> I am simply saying that with my DPL hat on, I think this issue is
> important enough it deserves real consideration.

I've posted
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/base-installer/merge_requests/1
to add a low-priority question for this, following Cyril's advice in
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=923091#10.  The text
may not be quite perfect, but I think it's a decent start.

I've deliberately avoided changing the default behaviour in this patch:
its effect is simply to make the behaviour configurable either via
expert mode or using preseeding (by setting base-installer/usrmerge to
false).  This is to maximise the chance of being able to get this change
into buster with a minimum of controversy of its own.  It is of course
simple to change the default behaviour and/or how prominently the
question is presented by way of follow-up changes, if the project so
chooses.

-- 
Colin Watson                                       [cjwatson@debian.org]