2021-03-17 17:33 GMT+01:00 Shengjing Zhu <z...@debian.org <mailto:zhsj%40debian.org>>: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:06 AM Filippo Valsorda <fili...@ml.filippo.io > <mailto:filippo%40ml.filippo.io>> wrote: > > > > 2021-03-17 16:19 GMT+01:00 nicoo <ni...@debian.org > > <mailto:nicoo%40debian.org>>: > > > This is currently blocked on golang-filippo-edwards25519 getting into > > > testing, which didn't happen because of the whole issue with NEW requiring > > > binary uploads and transition requiring source-only ones. > > > > Thank you for packaging age and for picking up this upload! > > > > I dropped the golang-filippo-edwards25519 dependency in v1.0.0-rc.1 to > > make it easier to get that version into Bullseye. > > > > Let me know if it's fine to add it back in a later v1.0, or if it would > > block bugfixes from making it into Bullseye during the cycle, and I > > should wait for v1.1. > > > > It depends on what version of age wants to be included in Bullseye. > As per Bullseye freeze policy[1], golang-filippo-edwards25519 is out > of luck to be included in Bullseye(No new package since 2/12). But it > will be included in the next release of cause. > Currently age v1.0.0-rc1 seems fine for Bullseye, it will migrated > from Unstable to Bullseye after 20 days.
v1.0.0-rc.1 is definitely ok for the Bullseye release. I was wondering if I should delay the golang-filippo-edwards25519 dependency to v1.1.0 to allow v1.0.x bugfixes into later Bullseye point releases, or if the bar for those is so high that it doesn't matter anyway.
