Hi,Great, thanks for your uploads. I was hesitant to upload restic v0.12 myself, and I concluded it was not "Only small, targeted fixes" that the soft freeze mandates. So, I'm not sure we can get it bullseye...
Regards, On 2021-02-17 10:31-0500, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Hi Felix, I took the liberty of updating restic to version 0.12 because I needed to use the rewritten prune feature to clean up a repository that was left unattended for too long. For this, I also had to update the golang-github-cenkalti-backoff package to version 4.1.0, which you updated in git but never got uploaded. The new restic 0.12 package seems to work just fine on my end. An "ratt" rebuild of the golang-github-cenkalti-backoff package identified 2 issues ( https://salsa.debian.org/-/snippets/526): - restic (well, the point of this exercise is to get to 0.12) - golang-github-xenolf-lego For the last one, I note that you filed https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=974866 and updated the package in salsa. I took the liberty of uploading your changes to experimental as well. I also ran ratt on that new upstream version and both docker.io and docker-registry pass. So, it seems to me that in order to have restic 0.12 in unstable, we'd need 3 uploads. All of these packages have autopkgtests and would TTBOMU pass the soft freeze policy. Any thoughts/concerns? -- Reinhard
-- Félix
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature