Re: Pseudotransition

[Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofborg@debian.org>]

Hi,

>Spoke slightly too soon -- I'm not sure yet whether libghc-zxcvbn-dev

>even needs a binNMU.  So it might be that there is an ABI break, but it
>affects no packages in Debian -- would that still be violating the
>freeze?
>
>(To be specific: the ZxcvbnInfo struct, which is passed to the library's
>interface function ZxcvbnMatch(), gained a new member.  But
>libghc-zxcvbn-c-dev unconditionally passes a null pointer instead of a
>pointer to a struct.)


as usual, I don't have any authoritative hat, but people consider a "transition"
something that involves more than 5-10 packages, in this case

your one seems to be an internal transition, and not worth a transition slot
(specially for haskell stuff, that is a permanent transition).
I think asking a slot to -release team will be an overkill, e.g.
think about setting up a ben file for a single reverse-dependency, and moreover
haskell is mostly never entangled with other stuff, so if you can test
them in advance for buildability, you should be safe to do whatever you prefer.
(in case you break the package... it won't be part of the next stable,
so consider also the possibility that an RC bug will kick it out)

G.