On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 06:33:49PM +0000, Alberto Bertogli wrote:
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 11:28:56PM +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote:
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 02:48:23PM +0000, Alberto Bertogli wrote:
> I updated package chasquid to the latest upstream version, 1.11.
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/chasquid/
>
> Can someone please review the changes and upload?
Although it seems like there's some change in upstream
systemd files. I haven't tested it (I don't use a self-hosted SMTP server) but I
did skim thorugh the diffs (which seems OK) and also assume as
upstream and package maintainer you tested it already.
Thanks for checking and flagging this!
Yes, the new upstream config has been tested against upstream's example
config file.
However, you made me realize I did not check updating the Debian package
version, which has two issues:
1) It is missing a key capability from upstream.
This is trivial to fix, and I will update the repo in salsa shortly after
this email.
Please do this quickly, as we currently are in soft freeze.
2) How will a package update behave? If the previously installed systemd
files will get overridden, then it can break working installations.
That's because chasquid's config file won't be necessarily updated to match
the new systemd files.
Right. It'd show a prompt with whether or not the user/sysadmin wants to
override the file. If they skip the step and end up keeping their
version, it'd break the install.
I think the onus is still mostly on the user to properly see the diffs
and then take a decision.
What you probably can do is add a README.Debian to let the sysadmin know
about such changes, but, but ...
So depending on the answer to #2 I will end up reversting these changes for
Debian :(
That being said, such changes look in-appropriate at this stage in the
release, which is mostly the time only for targeted fixes. So at least
for this time frame, I would suggest reverting this change.