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

Bug#1003176: transition: perl 5.34



Control: tags -1 confirmed

On 2022-01-23 12:45:16, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> Control: block -1 by 1002681
> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl-5.34.html
> 
> On 2022-01-05 17:00:54 +0000, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: transition
> > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-perl@lists.debian.org, perl@packages.debian.org
> > Control: block -1 with 1002093 997267 997189
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > we'd like a transition slot for Perl 5.34.
> > 
> > Should have done this months ago, but real life has interfered. Sorry
> > about that.
> > 
> > Perl 5.36 is scheluded for May or so, and I expect that will be our target
> > for bookworm.  Nevertheless, it's probably best to do this incrementally
> > and have a 5.34 transition now in case 5.36 turns out to be difficult
> > for some reason.
> > 
> > The changes in 5.34 are quite small, as upstream spent most of that
> > release cycle planning Perl 7 (which did not quite work out.) This
> > reflects in the very low number regressions we found in our test
> > rebuilds, visible at
> > 
> >   https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.34-transition;users=debian-perl@lists.debian.org
> > 
> > with just one bug open (openscap, not in testing).
> > 
> > I did a full archive test rebuild back in May, and partial test rebuilds
> > in August. Coming back to this now, I've done another round of test
> > rebuilds for those packages that will need binNMUs. I don't think another
> > full round is necessary: it seems unlikely that the other packages might
> > have introduced any Perl 5.34 related regressions in the meantime.
> > 
> > There's a few packages that have unrelated build failures in current sid.
> > I'm marking the ones in testing as blockers for this.
> 
> Some packages are also involved in the ongoing ocaml transition. So
> let's wait for ocaml to be done.

ocaml is done, so please go ahead.

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher


Reply to: