Path: csiph.com!1.us.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!news.servidellagleba.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: "Kingsley G. Morse Jr." Newsgroups: linux.debian.bugs.dist,linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Bug#1043240: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1? Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2023 22:10:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-bugs-dist-request@lists.debian.org Sun Dec 10 21:03:09 2023 Old-Return-Path: X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.961 Reply-To: "Kingsley G. Morse Jr." , 1043240@bugs.debian.org Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org Resent-Cc: Debian Science Team X-Debian-Pr-Message: followup 1043240 X-Debian-Pr-Package: python3-pandas X-Debian-Pr-Source: pandas MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Greylist: delayed 333 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at buxtehude; Sun, 10 Dec 2023 21:01:24 UTC X-Debian-Message: from BTS X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1810195 List-ID: List-URL: Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 59 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: 1043240@bugs.debian.org, Debian Science List , Debian Med Project List , debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Original-Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2023 12:55:43 -0800 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-References: <7e60a0ee-b7e0-4905-b8f7-78e602f3a4ac@zoho.com> <0ed32aff-e490-54ec-5890-9c10ca1e76bd@zoho.com> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.bugs.dist:1178046 linux.debian.maint.python:15341 Hi Rebecca, Julian and all science minded pythonistas of debian, great and small! I like your correspondence about upgrading from version 1.5 of pandas to 2.1. It's open, scientific and explores the ideal of proceeding wisely in a matter of public interest. My humble thoughts are: 1.) Rebecca: *Why* did you write that you'd like to move forward with the pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 transition? What's your reason? 2.) What may be the advantage of migrating to version 3.0 of Cython? 3.) The following one-liner suggests 44 debian packages might be affected by the breaks Rebecca said would be caused by pandas 2.x: $ for s in augur cnvkit dyda emperor esda mirtop pymatgen pyranges python-anndata python-biom-format python-cooler python-nanoget python-skbio python-ulmo q2-quality-control q2-demux q2-taxa q2-types q2templates sklearn-pandas ; do apt-cache search "$s" ; done | less 4.) The break that worries me the most is sklearn-pandas, because it seems to me that sklearn is popular and fundamental. Comment welcome, Kingsley On 12/10/2023 20:16, Julian Gilbey wrote: > On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 01:06:01PM +0000, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > > I'd like to move forward with the pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 transition reasonably > > soon. > > > > Given that pandas 2.x is *not* required for Python 3.12 (but is required for > > Cython 3.0), should we wait for the Python 3.12 transition to be done first? > > Well, I have seen at least one package that has an RC bug for the > Python 3.12 transition that might be because it's still using an old > version of cython3 :( So it's a bit of chicken-and-egg - having Cython > 3.0 might be very helpful. But then there is this list of 28 packages > broken by pandas 2.x. On the other hand, these will need fixing at > some point soon anyway, so I'd be in favour of doing the pandas > transition now, which will allow Cython 3.0 to move into unstable. > > Just my 2 cents' worth... > > Best wishes, > > Julian > -- Time is the fire in which we all burn.