Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
X-Debbugs-Cc: Vasyl Gello <vasek.gello@gmail.com>
Control: submitter -1 Vasyl Gello <vasek.gello@gmail.com>
Following #988611, I'm opening a new unblock bug to discuss the proposed
update of src:kodi to the 19.1 point release.
Here, I'm forwarding the message that Vasyl already sent to the
previous bug.
> I also prepared (but have not uploaded to Salsa yet) the 2:19.1+dfsg2-1 that uses
> the same embedded copies that were used in 2:19.0+dfsg1-1 that is currently in
> bullseye.
>
> Filtered diff from 2:19.0+dfsg1-2 to 2:19.1+dfsg2-1 is attached with the following
> filtrdiff options:
>
> filterdiff kodi_19.0+dfsg1-2_19.1+dfsg2-1.diff \
> -x "*/addons/*.xml" \
> -x "*/cmake/scripts/windows/*" \
> -x "*/docs/*" \
> -x "*/Changelog" \
> -x "*/Makefile.in" \
> -x "*/*.m4" \
> -x "*/configure" \
> -x "*/msvc/*" \
> -x "*/media/*" \
> -x "*/system/*" \
> -x "*/tools/buildsteps/windows/*" \
> -x "*/xbmc/cores/VideoPlayer/VideoRenderers/windows/*" \
> -x "*/xbmc/windowing/win10/*" \
> -x "*/xbmc/windowing/windows/*" \
> 1>kodi_19.0+dfsg1-2_19.1+dfsg2-1.filtered.diff
Also, two other messages to give some context:
On 2021-05-30 16:10:02 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> On 2021-05-30 09:25:27 +0000, Vasyl Gello wrote:
> > As I wrote in the private message to you earlier this week, I don't want to take
> > responsibility from the Kodi upstream and cherry-pick only some bugfixes that might
> > be considered "important" from my PoV. This creates an inconsistent user experience
> > across vanilla Kodi and Kodi from Debian, plus requires me to spend even more time
> > carefully testing each combination of cherry-picked commits in addition to all the
> > time I already spent fixing a lot of stuff upstream and in Debian.
> >
> > The Kodi upstream has an estabilished testing and backport culture, and it is not that
> > easy to slip a risky change into a stable branch (which 19.x currently is). Plus all
> > upstream changes must pass CI before getting merged.
> >
> > If it is not possible to have 19.x point (bugfix) releases in bullseye, I think
> > I will upload next point releases to experimental during the bullseye freeze,
> > then to bullseye-backports after bookworm development cycle starts. And for stable
> > branch I will port only CVE fixes and bug fixes reported to Debian.
>
> I don't think my previous answer implied that the 19.x bugfix release
> is unfit for bullseye. It was an attempt to get some important fixes
> into the release as -2 first, and to then have a look at the
> other changes.
>
> Unfortunately your descriptions of the changes in kodi (and all the
> plugins) are very terse and only highlight changes that sound like they
> would fit the freeze policy. The other changes -- like the
> reimplementation of kodi's logging which is a few hundred lines if not
> more or newly added features -- are swept under the rug. We do not have
> the time to dig into upstream's decision to include those changes and the
> associated risks. If you as maintainer think that it's worth having
> these changes in bullseye, please help us reviewing the changes by
> explaining why the changes are needed and the potential regressions
> they could introduce.
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
kodi_19.0+dfsg1-2_19.1+dfsg2-1.filtered.diff.gz
Description: application/gzip
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature