Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #15428

Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1

From "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com>
Newsgroups linux.debian.bugs.dist, linux.debian.maint.python
Subject Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1
Date 2024-01-22 22:00 +0100
Message-ID <HZ9yF-4Tap-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <HYI5r-4Bu8-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <H0eoN-ctw-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <HZ187-4MVp-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <H0eoN-ctw-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <HZ187-4MVp-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On 22/01/2024 11:51, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Please could we wait until the "Python 3.12 is a supported version"
> transition is completed?

How are you defining that?  python3-defaults 3.11.6+ in testing?  (I was 
previously told 3.12-supporting pandas and numpy in testing, which has 
happened.  I don't think any of these 25 packages are on 
https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=python3-defaults , but I 
haven't checked carefully, and at least influxdb-python and tqdm do have 
what I suspect are Python 3.12 related issues.)

> Adding another 25 or so RC bugs at this
> point will just slow down that transition.

What exactly do you want not done until then?   Just not uploading 
pandas 2.x to unstable, or is it also a problem to have these bugs 
marked as RC in the BTS?  (In all 22 cases that are in testing at all, 
the bug is also present in the version in testing, so it being RC 
shouldn't block migration.)

> (Unless pandas 1.5 is
> preventing the transition, that is.)

It isn't.

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2023-12-10 14:30 +0100
  Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 Julian Gilbey <jdg@debian.org> - 2023-12-10 21:30 +0100
    Bug#1043240: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1? "Kingsley G. Morse Jr." <kingsley@loaner.com> - 2023-12-10 22:10 +0100
      Bug#1043240: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1? Drew Parsons <dparsons@debian.org> - 2023-12-11 00:40 +0100
      Bug#1043240: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1? Julian Gilbey <jdg@debian.org> - 2023-12-11 11:10 +0100
  Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2023-12-11 08:20 +0100
    Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2023-12-11 18:40 +0100
  Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2024-01-21 16:40 +0100
    Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2024-01-21 19:40 +0100
      Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 Stelios Moschos <stel.moschos@gmail.com> - 2024-01-21 20:40 +0100
    Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> - 2024-01-22 13:20 +0100
      Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2024-01-22 22:00 +0100
        Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> - 2024-01-23 13:40 +0100
          Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 Graham Inggs <ginggs@debian.org> - 2024-01-26 07:50 +0100
            Bug#1043240: transition: pandas 1.5 -> 2.1 Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> - 2024-01-26 08:40 +0100

csiph-web