Re: Timing on `Rules-Requires-Root: no` being the new default

Hi Niels,

On 29-12-2024 11:12, Niels Thykier wrote:
>   * Do you think it is feasible for us to do this change in Trixie and,
>     if so, do you have any preferences for timing or bug counts that we
>     should keep in mind?

If you are committing yourself to solve the issues (as you say, one line 
NMUs possible) within a month or two, I suggest you go ahead now and 
don't defer. If you don't commit (also fine, you're a volunteer), I 
rather have this wait until after the release of trixie.

> # Key packages

Do any of these packages have risky proper fixes? I prefer to not take 
too much risk here, so I'd prefer the single line "fix" than something 
that takes two or three uploads to get right. I assume that building 
with and without the patch and comparing with diffoscope should be able 
to proof you got a patch right, so I expect you can bring the risk to 
near zero.

>   * 157 bugs would become RC if we hit the button today.

 From a social point of view, I would appreciate it if you actively help 
prevent autoremoval due to this change if you go forward with this 
before trixie.

Paul

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

wsB5BAABCAAjFiEEWLZtSHNr6TsFLeZynFyZ6wW9dQoFAmd2ZpUFAwAAAAAACgkQnFyZ6wW9dQot
0wgArYE9oQQA6CvLSHNl0jSyD7MJa+NTv/3F6InrVeadL7m4Axvf5wKntjjqp8w/tO7J3HdAWmzx
YMwJOXUfRe3aUzBFJasxo1uvo3lRVHFvwo4oCpJPxH+ASa8P5CFAZySv5ZUDY0aVzO3CksRzsC8w
CN6mTsXGoiFCF4U+OVLKPeuo8SCq4x2jlgw1Ila6FmZYbtdXMEmIIZJ7oPp4z5uwMNE5qrbz/iZu
GcW9py3SS0MNBOVvvZJEfeIvHtsTaIRyTVd7PALVP9EUzR33v9TH4zmpiOYFdFz/R7KKgBblo6y4
PTLE+wyOmOjVTZxBkVMg9AEvljcH9N0rX+ocDJdMtg==
=k/Lt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----