[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#989257: marked as done (unblock: kodi/2:19.1+dfsg2-1)

Your message dated Mon, 07 Jun 2021 18:36:54 +0000
with message-id <E1lqK7K-0004ur-Kf@respighi.debian.org>
and subject line unblock kodi
has caused the Debian Bug report #989257,
regarding unblock: kodi/2:19.1+dfsg2-1
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
989257: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=989257
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
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


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Unblocked.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: