[Summary]
MIR review for libisoburn
MIR team ACK under the constraint to resolve the below listed
required TODOs and as much as possible having a look at the
recommended TODOs.
This does not need a security review
List of specific binary packages to be promoted to main: xorriso, libisoburn1, libisoburn-dev, libisoburn-doc

Notes:
Required TODOs:
- In addition of this MIR for the 3 packages, ensure that jigit MIR is also acked (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jigit/+bug/1978066).
- Symbol tracking is not in place for libisoburn. Please add some tracking for the libisoburn symbols.
Recommended TODOs:
- There are quite a lot of warning during build (see section), I think some of them are valid and should be fixed. Mind looking at them? (Warnings are always asking for more warnings and could be overlooked)
- The package should get a team bug subscriber before being promoted


[Duplication]
libisoburn/libisofs/libburn will replace genisoimage usage in main.

[Dependencies]
OK:
- no other Dependencies to MIR due to this than the ones listed in description and jigit which is in another MIR (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jigit/+bug/1978066)
- libisoburn checked with `check-mir`
- no -dev/-debug/-doc packages that need exclusion
- No dependencies in main that are only superficially tested requiring more tests now.

Problems:
- ensure that jigit MIR is acked (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jigit/+bug/1978066)

[Embedded sources and static linking]
OK:
- no embedded source present
- no static linking
- does not have odd Built-Using entries

OK:
- not a go package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard

[Security]
OK:
- history of CVEs does not look concerning
- does not run a daemon as root
- does not use webkit1,2
- does not use lib*v8 directly
- does not parse data formats
- does not open a port/socket
- does not process arbitrary web content
- does not use centralized online accounts
- does not integrate arbitrary javascript into the desktop
- does not deal with system authentication (eg, pam), etc)
- does not deal with security attestation (secure boot, tpm, signatures)

[Common blockers]
OK:
- does not FTBFS currently
- does have a test suite that runs at build time
- test suite fails will fail the build upon error.
- does have the releng non-trivial test suite that runs as autopkgtest
- no new python2 dependency

[Packaging red flags]
OK:
- Ubuntu does carry a delta, but it is reasonable and maintenance under
  control
- d/watch is present and looks ok (if needed, e.g. non-native)
- Upstream update history is slow (but acceptable for this kind of project due to the history)
- Debian/Ubuntu update history is good
- the current release is packaged
- promoting this does not seem to cause issues for MOTUs that so far
- no massive Lintian warnings
- d/rules is rather clean
- It is not on the lto-disabled list

Problems:
- symbol tracking is not in place for libisoburn and only rely on shlibs. Any reason to not have a real symbol tracking?

[Upstream red flags]
OK:
- no incautious use of malloc/sprintf (as far as we can check it)
- no use of sudo, gksu, pkexec, or LD_LIBRARY_PATH (usage is OK inside
  tests) as long as xorriso-dd-target is excluded.
- no use of user nobody
- use of setuid possible, but ok because xorriso does not by default.
- no important open bugs (crashers, etc) in Debian or Ubuntu
- no dependency on webkit, qtwebkit, seed or libgoa-*
- not part of the UI for extra checks
- no translation present, but none needed for this case

Problems:
- There are a bunch of warnings during builds. Some of them sounds fixable and it’s probably the right time to look at them.