Hi Matthias, Both of us agree with the unlikelyness of the situation to some extent. On the other hand, people are doing test upgrades now and I know that a significant number of systems run incus from bookworm-backports now.
On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 05:44:10PM +0000, Mathias Gibbens wrote: > I am inclined to lower the severity of this bug, so Incus can migrate > to testing, then close it after a new backport has been uploaded. If > Incus had been part of the bookworm release, I would be more concerned > about possible breakage during an upgrade to trixie, but Incus has only > ever been available via backports for bookworm. As such, it's more of > an "opt-in" situation with users needing to explicitly install it from > backports. I also intend to backport the 6.0.4 release later this > month, which will be another incentive for people to do an update well > in advance of the trixie release, further minimizing the likelihood of > someone actually encountering this upgrade issue. Why would you knowingly let breakage slip through when there is a very simple path for mitigation (upgrading Replaces to Conflicts)? What is it that you gain in not just uploading the suggested change? Generally speaking, I reached an agreement with the release team that /usr-move issues should prevent testing migration via filing rc bugs. This bug really is meant as a migration blocker. In case you lower severity, I'm going to let a release team member judge the severity. Helmut
