Re: Is an MBF and unblock for packages introducing new files in /bin or /sbin or /lib in Bookworm acceptable at this stage?

[Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> writes:

    Michael> Am 22.05.23 um 21:34 schrieb Sam Hartman:
    >> enough benefit to justify breaking testing.
    >> 

    Michael> No-one is breaking testing, as files are not moved between
    Michael> packages.

Files are moved between packages all the time *outside of a freeze*.
After bookworm is released, I expect the freeze to end and testing to be
unfrozen.
At that point, I expect files to move between packages in testing.

Going back to my original timeline:

 * User installs version from testing with file in /bin
 * Maintainer quickly moves the file to /usr/bin per your MBF
 * Bookworm releases; user does not upgrade at this point

At this point in my timeline, bookworm is released, and the freeze ends.
Users of stable are okay.
But users of testing continue to track a now-ufrozen testing,
and then
 * Package reorganization; file moves between packages
 * User upgrades; file disappears

To clarify, we could add an item like "package migrates into unfrozen  testing"
between the above items.

Again, I think this MBF would be safe if we only cared about bookworm
users.
But I think that tracking testing through a release and not ever
actually upgrading to the released version, but instead upgrading from
testing two weeks before the release to testing after the freeze thaws
is generally considered a supported operation.