Hi Ondřej, On 19-11-2021 21:41, Ondřej Surý wrote:
I disagree, but I uploaded reverted package. It’s after release and we have two years before next release and a year before PHP 8.2, so unstable could be a bit unstable. It’s not like the bump from php7.4 to php8.1 is that large as it was from php5.6 to php7.0.
Thanks for your willingness to cooperate, even though you don't agree. And sorry the way I phrased my response yesterday. I was too surprised and one of "my" packages got broken (see the cacti autopkgtest results). (I knew this from your previous upload to experimental, but had forgotten about it and I haven't seen a bug report about it yet). I feared (without proper checking, I should have done that) that cacti wouldn't be the only one broken without warning. (I'll handle cacti shortly, its new upstream release should at least work with php 8.0).
The transition to php8.x has been announced a year ago.
To the release team, yes, but how about the affected packages maintainers? And how about *coordinating* a transition? That's where transition bug are for [1]. If you tell us when you're ready to start a transition, we can tell you when it fits in all the other transitions. There are enough collisions mentioned on the transition page [1] to warrant an ACK from the release team before going ahead.
In this particular case, we would have asked if bugs had been filed for all reverse dependencies that are known to be broken. As mention above at least cacti is missing such a bug report. Maybe there are more? As mentioned by David, it would be helpful to have an upload to experimental doing the bump there. So issues can be weed out before the transition starts.
Paul [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions [2] https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/php8.1.html
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature