Update pin for libsvm

[regro-cf-autotick-bot]

This PR has been triggered in an effort to update the pin for libsvm. The current pinned version is 3.21, the latest available version is 325 and the max pin pattern is x.x. This migration will impact 2 feedstocks.

Checklist:

• The new version is a stable supported pin.
• I checked that the ABI changed from 3.21 to 325.

**Please note that if you close this PR we presume that the new pin has been rejected.

@conda-forge-admin please ping libsvm
This PR was generated by https://github.com/regro/autotick-bot/actions/runs/750429367, please use this URL for debugging

[conda-forge-linter]

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-webservice.

I was asked to ping @conda-forge/libsvm and so here I am doing that.

[conda-forge-linter]

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe) and found it was in an excellent condition.

[bkpoon]

Sorry! I've been busy with other things and have not had a chance to look at this until now. A previous PR for updating the pin for libsvm is in #1099.

The versioning should have been 321 for 3.21 (the initial recipe removes the "." when constructing the source tarball filename), and from an earlier pull request in the libsvm feedstock (conda-forge/libsvm-feedstock#7), the ABI from version 321 to 324 should not have changed (https://abi-laboratory.pro/index.php?view=timeline&l=libsvm) and there does not seem any ABI changes for 325 based on the commit history.

What kind of patch would be needed for https://github.com/conda-forge/conda-forge-repodata-patches-feedstock? It looks like I would modify gen_patch_json.py and have an entry in def _gen_new_index that looks like

if record_name == 'libsvm':
  < do something >

but it's not clear to me what to do.

Also, a secondary question. With version 325, there is now an official Python binding for libsvm named libsvm-official. Do I add the Python binding as an extra output in libsvm-feedstock or should I create a new recipe for libsvm-official?

Thanks!

[hmaarrfk]

Jumping on old PR.

Truthfully, I don't find launching migrations to be ver disastrous. This would rebuild a few feedstocks (2 in this case) which is somewhat a good idea to avoid any errors in ABI changes that might have occured.

[hmaarrfk]

I've asked for more clarification on this issue, but I feel your challenges when making PRs to the repodata patches.

[hmaarrfk]

#3368