Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1241499

Is a self-contained upgrade considered large/disruptive? (was Re: Bug#1102599: rust-tonic: please upgrade to 0.13 with upcoming upgrade of rust-prost 0.13)

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Dear RT,

(Please consider this specific issue low priority,
but I think it's useful to clarify a general question.)

On 11/04/2025 03:44, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Blair Noctis (2025-04-10 21:26:26)
>> I'm about to upgrade the prost family from 0.12 to 0.13.
> 
> That sounds like a "large or disruptive changes to unstable" which the
> release team as explicitly stated is not ok during freeze, so please
> refrain from doing that, or if needed then please ask the release team
> for an exception.

The affected packages are:

prost family, target of this upgrade:

- rust-prost-build
- rust-prost-types
- rust-prost
- rust-prost-derive

Dependents:

- rust-parsec-service
- rust-parsec-interface
- rust-pprof
- rust-tonic
- rust-axum
- rust-cast-sender
- rust-prometheus-client
- netavark
- gnome-authenticator

I have prepared all of them for this upgrade.
All build and pass tests.

I regret to have not noticed this chance and prepared earlier.
But:
I argue this is not "disruptive":
Updates of the prost family only affect listed dependents.
Updates of said dependents don't introduce breaking changes.
The whole upgrade is self-contained and does not "leak" to other packages.
Also not "large":
All considered, the "blast radius" is 13 packages.
This is fairly small IMO.
All rust-* packages besides rust-tonic and rust-axum are maintained in the Rust team,
of which I'm a member, thus in the position to handle.
In rust-tonic and rust-axum,
maintained by Jonas whose words are quoted above,
the former received a prepared upgrade for the former (#1102599, this bug),
and the latter requires only a version bump (#1102597).
netavark is maintained by Reinhard Tartler (siretart),
and gnome-authenticator by Jeremy Bícha (jbicha),
both also requiring only a version bump,
and both gave approval (netavark #1102598, g-a on IRC).
This is a fairly small circle.

So:
If all packages affected are handled ("self-contained"),
the blast radius is rather small,
and I have the go from all affected maintainers,
is it still considered large/disruptive?

Thanks.

Btw, when asked on IRC,
Ramacher said it depends on the size of debdiffs,
so here they are:
https://people.debian.org/~ncts/rust-prost-0.13-affected-debdiffs/
(Cargo.lock stripped as it's basically dead weight)

-- 
‌    ,Sdrager
Blair Noctis

Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Bug#1102599: rust-tonic: please upgrade to 0.13 with upcoming upgrade of rust-prost 0.13 Blair Noctis <ncts@debian.org> - 2025-04-10 21:40 +0200
  Bug#1102599: rust-tonic: please upgrade to 0.13 with upcoming upgrade of rust-prost 0.13 Blair Noctis <ncts@debian.org> - 2025-04-10 21:50 +0200
  Bug#1102599: rust-tonic: please upgrade to 0.13 with upcoming upgrade of rust-prost 0.13 Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-04-10 21:50 +0200
    Is a self-contained upgrade considered large/disruptive? (was Re:  Bug#1102599: rust-tonic: please upgrade to 0.13 with upcoming upgrade of  rust-prost 0.13) Blair Noctis <ncts@debian.org> - 2025-04-11 17:20 +0200
      Re: Is a self-contained upgrade considered large/disruptive? (was Re:  Bug#1102599: rust-tonic: please upgrade to 0.13 with upcoming upgrade of  rust-prost 0.13) Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> - 2025-04-12 12:50 +0200
        Re: Is a self-contained upgrade considered large/disruptive? (was Re:  Bug#1102599: rust-tonic: please upgrade to 0.13 with upcoming upgrade of  rust-prost 0.13) Blair Noctis <ncts@debian.org> - 2025-04-12 17:40 +0200

csiph-web