Hi Steve, Quoting Steve Langasek (2022-09-09 07:09:32) > My feedback to you on IRC was that I think it's inappropriate for you to go > package-by-package in the BTS to the packages in the base set expecting > support for a feature that has to my knowledge never been surfaced for > project-wide discussion on debian-devel or similar. > > So if you want to take that discussion to the Technical Committee to ratify > as something that base packages must support, well, I don't think that's the > best use of the TC vs just starting a thread on debian-devel, I agree that this is not the best use of the TC's time. Since we both agree on that and since it has been more than three weeks since our post to d-devel [1] without any concerns or otherwise negative feedback, do you still want to wait for the TC to decide or do you want to cut it short by applying our patch? [1] https://lists.debian.org/166289720850.2390.3729551131862514967@localhost > but it does satisfy my expectation that there be a project-level review of > the design prior to obligating base package maintainers to support this > feature. We are working on some changes to Debian policy in #1020323 but we are not planning to put any "must" statements in the text. Our intention is not to obligate anybody to do anything other than apply reasonable patches that we provide. If it breaks, it is not your responsibility to fix it. Since the DPKG_ROOT variable is empty during normal installations I hope you agree that our patch will not be able to introduce any bugs during normal package installation. If the chrootless bootstrapping should fail in the future, it is not the obligation of package maintainers to fix it. We have said so multiple times in the past already... josch
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature