Bug#1012362: transition: luajit

["M. Zhou" <lumin@debian.org>]

I have uploaded luajit/unstable 2.1.0~beta3+git20210112+dfsg-2,
but please hold on. I should have split the ppc64el architecture
removal to a future revision... Now that the ppc64el architecture
is missing for src:luajit, and we still cannot safely remove
luajit:ppc64el without manually changing their build depends
into libluajit2-5.1-2 [ppc64el s390x] | libluajit-5.1-2 ...

I'm thinking of yet another solution for the IBM architecture
transition. It's to add ppc64el and s390x back into src:luajit,
but make all binary packages transitional dummy packages,
i.e.

Package: libluajit-5.1-2
Architecture: ppc64el s390x
Depends: libluajit2-5.1-2
Description: transitional dummy package

This should be achievable by patching debian/control
during build once detected IBM architectures.

IIRC adding new architecture without new binary package
does not have to go through NEW. So this architecture-specific
transitional dummy package solution should be able to help
us smoothly deal with IBM architectures.

Does that sound good?
If so I'll prepare another upload before we really start
the transition.

On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 20:45 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Control: tag -1 confirmed
> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libluajit2-support.html
> 
> Hi Mo,
> 
> On 05-06-2022 19:30, M. Zhou wrote:
> > So, currently I have a pending commit[2] modifying the dependency template[1],
> > so that src:luajit reverse dependencies can be rebuilt without source
> > modification to allow library fallback.
> > 
> > Specifically, before transition, luajit reverse dependencies will have:
> >    Depends: libluajit-5.1-2
> > After transition, they should have:
> >    Depends: libluajit-5.1-2 | libluajit2-5.1-2
> > And the only thing we need to do is to upload the pending commit[2]
> > once approved. Then we just trigger a rebuild for all luajit reverse
> > dependencies.
> 
> Please go ahead.
> 
> Paul