So it would be interesting to know how the users who were seeing this bug ran into the problem. It seems unlikely to be due to a deliberate request by the user for libxml2-dev:i386, which is not something users are likely to try to install. I think the libxml2 coinstallability bug, despite definitely being a bug, is a lower priority one; and I'm more interested to understand what's happening, in terms of the package manager, that's putting people in this situation.
I really don't think this particular bug is SRU material though and should be untargeted.
So it would be interesting to know how the users who were seeing this bug ran into the problem. It seems unlikely to be due to a deliberate request by the user for libxml2-dev:i386, which is not something users are likely to try to install. I think the libxml2 coinstallability bug, despite definitely being a bug, is a lower priority one; and I'm more interested to understand what's happening, in terms of the package manager, that's putting people in this situation.
I really don't think this particular bug is SRU material though and should be untargeted.