Dear release team,

it seems likely that britney will consider the current systemd upload as
ok for migration. However, it still does not include the changes imposed
by the Debian technical committee. Negotiation about the inclusion of
those changes and the exact implementation of already included changes
is ongoing with the systemd maintainers. In the interest of avoiding unnecessary churn for trixie users, we suggest that you temporarily
block systemd from migration. Of course the decision about migration
remains in with you.

Thanks for considering

Helmut
for the Debian Technical Committee

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 at 16:27, Helmut Grohne <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear release team,

it seems likely that britney will consider the current systemd upload as
ok for migration. However, it still does not include the changes imposed
by the Debian technical committee. Negotiation about the inclusion of
those changes and the exact implementation of already included changes
is ongoing with the systemd maintainers. In the interest of avoiding unnecessary churn for trixie users, we suggest that you temporarily
block systemd from migration. Of course the decision about migration
remains in with you.

Sorry, but I am slightly confused - I presented the following plan to
the TC on 2025/04/04 at 19:20 UTC+1:

What do you think about the following plan:

- today: restoring nspawn/arm64 and removing the conflict to

dracut/arm64 and uploading, so that everything that's currently
pending can migrate to testing, and hopefully make some people
slightly less unhappy

- as soon as the new PR is open and in a good state (CI is green,

etc), backport it and do another upload

Stefano replied and accepted for the TC on 2025/04/05 at 13:37 UTC+1.
It's a private conversation so I won't quote directly.

There are 2 TC bugs. #1098914 is already included in unstable.

#1079329 only reached the aforementioned good state a couple of hours
ago, and since then I've already backported and queued it in Salsa as
per the previous agreement, and already communicated that it would be
uploaded tomorrow, after the current version migrates:

https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-systemd-maintainers/2025-April/048117.html

Why the u-turn now? I wanted to let the current version migrate as it
contains a lot of bug fixes, without waiting two more days. And I am
not aware of any more "ongoing negotiations", just letting debci and
britney run their courses.

If it's important for both of these changes to be in the same
migration for any reason (they are unrelated? This is the first I hear
about it), you could have just asked...?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

FYI I have uploaded the backport for #1079329 too a few hours ago,
although it seems stuck somewhere in the ftp machinery - I checked
logs and multiple source uploads seem to be affected, so probably
nothing to worry about and just need to wait a bit:

https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-systemd-maintainers/2025-April/048118.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi Luca (2025.04.07_15:49:05_+0000)

Sorry, but I am slightly confused - I presented the following plan to
the TC on 2025/04/04 at 19:20 UTC+1:

Our apologies, the bit about letting the nspawn return migrate was
missed by most people.

I see systemd 257.5-1 has now been uploaded, and includes the patch to
fix #1079329. I'm expecting that this will mean that the TC's decisions
have been carried out.

As things stand I don't think we need to be adding any blocks for
systemd.

Stefano
for the Technical Committee

--
Stefano Rivera
http://tumbleweed.org.za/
+1 415 683 3272

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)