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

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #15960 > unrolled thread

Proposal IRC meeting DPT

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  Proposal IRC meeting DPT Emmanuel Arias <eamanu@debian.org> - 2024-06-22 00:10 +0200
    Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT weepingclown <weepingclown@disroot.org> - 2024-06-22 00:20 +0200
      Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Emmanuel Arias <eamanu@debian.org> - 2024-06-22 03:10 +0200
        Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Mechtilde <ooo@mechtilde.de> - 2024-06-22 08:40 +0200
    Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2024-06-24 10:50 +0200
      Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2024-06-29 10:50 +0200
        Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Alexandre Detiste <alexandre.detiste@gmail.com> - 2024-06-29 16:10 +0200
          Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2024-06-29 18:00 +0200
            Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2024-06-29 19:40 +0200
              Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT) Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de> - 2024-06-29 20:00 +0200
                Re: Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT) Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> - 2024-06-29 20:40 +0200
                  Re: Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT) Alexandre Detiste <alexandre.detiste@gmail.com> - 2024-06-29 22:10 +0200
                    Re: Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT) Emmanuel Arias <eamanu@debian.org> - 2024-07-01 00:10 +0200
                      Re: Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT) Alexandre Detiste <alexandre.detiste@gmail.com> - 2024-07-01 00:30 +0200
              Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2024-06-29 20:30 +0200
                Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2024-06-29 21:20 +0200
                Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Louis-Philippe Véronneau <pollo@debian.org> - 2024-06-30 05:40 +0200
                Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2024-07-01 20:10 +0200
                  Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2024-07-01 20:20 +0200

#15960 — Proposal IRC meeting DPT

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi team,

As the Louis-Philippe and Andreas response to my last mail [0]
I would like to propose a (regular?) IRC meeting to try to organize
the work inside the team. I would like to propose an IRC meeting
on 5 July, perhaps a good time could be around 12PM UTC and 4PM UTC?
That date and time work for you? Any different idea, time, hour is
welcome.

I would like to propose the next points:
* List of packages that need to be removed [1] and how could we tackle
them.
* Effort needed to fix py3.12 or should be go directly to 3.13?
* Check possible agenda for Python BoF for DebConf2024.

This is not the final agenda for this possible meeting, I would like
to hear your opinion first :-)

[0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2024/06/msg00045.html
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Python/Dead%20Batteries
[2] https://pad.dc24.debconf.org/p/python-team-bof


Cheers,
Emmanuel

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#15961

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

I do support the idea of an IRC meeting. although the availability of others (maybe even myself) is something I can't comment on. But I still think trying this out, at the very least, would be nice. Hopefully this can be a catalyst for finishing up the 3.12 migration. 3.13 migration is probably a topic suited for the debconf BoF.

Best,
Ananthu

On 21 June 2024 10:06:47 pm UTC, Emmanuel Arias <eamanu@debian.org> wrote:
>Hi team,
>
>As the Louis-Philippe and Andreas response to my last mail [0]
>I would like to propose a (regular?) IRC meeting to try to organize
>the work inside the team. I would like to propose an IRC meeting
>on 5 July, perhaps a good time could be around 12PM UTC and 4PM UTC?
>That date and time work for you? Any different idea, time, hour is
>welcome.
>
>I would like to propose the next points:
>* List of packages that need to be removed [1] and how could we tackle
>them.
>* Effort needed to fix py3.12 or should be go directly to 3.13?
>* Check possible agenda for Python BoF for DebConf2024.
>
>This is not the final agenda for this possible meeting, I would like
>to hear your opinion first :-)
>
>[0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2024/06/msg00045.html
>[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Python/Dead%20Batteries
>[2] https://pad.dc24.debconf.org/p/python-team-bof
>
>
>Cheers,
>Emmanuel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15962

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

Thanks for your reply. Yes, day and time it's just a proposal.

Cheers,
Emmanuel
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 10:16:51PM +0000, weepingclown wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I do support the idea of an IRC meeting. although the availability of others (maybe even myself) is something I can't comment on. But I still think trying this out, at the very least, would be nice. Hopefully this can be a catalyst for finishing up the 3.12 migration. 3.13 migration is probably a topic suited for the debconf BoF.
> 
> Best,
> Ananthu
> 
> On 21 June 2024 10:06:47 pm UTC, Emmanuel Arias <eamanu@debian.org> wrote:
> >Hi team,
> >
> >As the Louis-Philippe and Andreas response to my last mail [0]
> >I would like to propose a (regular?) IRC meeting to try to organize
> >the work inside the team. I would like to propose an IRC meeting
> >on 5 July, perhaps a good time could be around 12PM UTC and 4PM UTC?
> >That date and time work for you? Any different idea, time, hour is
> >welcome.
> >
> >I would like to propose the next points:
> >* List of packages that need to be removed [1] and how could we tackle
> >them.
> >* Effort needed to fix py3.12 or should be go directly to 3.13?
> >* Check possible agenda for Python BoF for DebConf2024.
> >
> >This is not the final agenda for this possible meeting, I would like
> >to hear your opinion first :-)
> >
> >[0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2024/06/msg00045.html
> >[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Python/Dead%20Batteries
> >[2] https://pad.dc24.debconf.org/p/python-team-bof
> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Emmanuel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15963

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Time frame is ok for me

Am 22.06.24 um 03:07 schrieb Emmanuel Arias:
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for your reply. Yes, day and time it's just a proposal.
> 
> Cheers,
> Emmanuel
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 10:16:51PM +0000, weepingclown wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I do support the idea of an IRC meeting. although the availability of others (maybe even myself) is something I can't comment on. But I still think trying this out, at the very least, would be nice. Hopefully this can be a catalyst for finishing up the 3.12 migration. 3.13 migration is probably a topic suited for the debconf BoF.
>>
>> Best,
>> Ananthu
>>
>> On 21 June 2024 10:06:47 pm UTC, Emmanuel Arias <eamanu@debian.org> wrote:
>>> Hi team,
>>>
>>> As the Louis-Philippe and Andreas response to my last mail [0]
>>> I would like to propose a (regular?) IRC meeting to try to organize
>>> the work inside the team. I would like to propose an IRC meeting
>>> on 5 July, perhaps a good time could be around 12PM UTC and 4PM UTC?
>>> That date and time work for you? Any different idea, time, hour is
>>> welcome.
>>>
>>> I would like to propose the next points:
>>> * List of packages that need to be removed [1] and how could we tackle
>>> them.
>>> * Effort needed to fix py3.12 or should be go directly to 3.13?
>>> * Check possible agenda for Python BoF for DebConf2024.
>>>
>>> This is not the final agenda for this possible meeting, I would like
>>> to hear your opinion first :-)
>>>
>>> [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2024/06/msg00045.html
>>> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Python/Dead%20Batteries
>>> [2] https://pad.dc24.debconf.org/p/python-team-bof
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Emmanuel

-- 
Mechtilde Stehmann

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15965

On 22.06.24 00:06, Emmanuel Arias wrote:
> Hi team,
> 
> As the Louis-Philippe and Andreas response to my last mail [0]
> I would like to propose a (regular?) IRC meeting to try to organize
> the work inside the team. I would like to propose an IRC meeting
> on 5 July, perhaps a good time could be around 12PM UTC and 4PM UTC?
> That date and time work for you? Any different idea, time, hour is
> welcome.
> 
> I would like to propose the next points:
> * List of packages that need to be removed [1] and how could we tackle
> them.
> * Effort needed to fix py3.12 or should be go directly to 3.13?

The current status is tracked in
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1061188

it's now uploaded to unstable, and we'll start doing the binNMUs.

Going directly to 3.13 is really not an option, Debian is relying on the 
upstream status of many packages, something that Debian cannot do on 
it's own.

> * Check possible agenda for Python BoF for DebConf2024.

3.13 definitely is a topic for the Python BoF, especially when trying to 
default to 3.13 for the next Debian release. I will be there for the two 
last days of DebCamp, and will have time to work on any 3.13 
preparations.  I know, Stefano will be there as well, and hopefully not 
only involved with the video team ;p

Matthias

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15972

On 24.06.24 10:42, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 22.06.24 00:06, Emmanuel Arias wrote:
>> Hi team,
>>
>> As the Louis-Philippe and Andreas response to my last mail [0]
>> I would like to propose a (regular?) IRC meeting to try to organize
>> the work inside the team. I would like to propose an IRC meeting
>> on 5 July, perhaps a good time could be around 12PM UTC and 4PM UTC?
>> That date and time work for you? Any different idea, time, hour is
>> welcome.
>>
>> I would like to propose the next points:
>> * List of packages that need to be removed [1] and how could we tackle
>> them.
>> * Effort needed to fix py3.12 or should be go directly to 3.13?
> 
> The current status is tracked in
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1061188
> 
> it's now uploaded to unstable, and we'll start doing the binNMUs.

binNMUs are now done, next thing is to get python3-defaults migrating, 
filing bug reports and fixing for all the failed autopkg tests triggered 
by https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python3-defaults

plus looking at the messages on the same page like

migrating python3/3.12.2-1/amd64 to testing makes FOO uninstallable

and fixing those.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15973

Hi,

Should the severity of the distutils removal bugs be bumped now ?
Example such bug: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1065939


Greetings

Le sam. 29 juin 2024 à 10:46, Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> a écrit :
> binNMUs are now done, next thing is to get python3-defaults migrating,
> filing bug reports and fixing for all the failed autopkg tests triggered
> by https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python3-defaults
>
> plus looking at the messages on the same page like
>
> migrating python3/3.12.2-1/amd64 to testing makes FOO uninstallable
>
> and fixing those.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15974

I would say no.  Distutils is going to be with us for quite some time, even though it's no longer part of the standard distribution.

Scott K

On June 29, 2024 2:07:56 PM UTC, Alexandre Detiste <alexandre.detiste@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Should the severity of the distutils removal bugs be bumped now ?
>Example such bug: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1065939
>
>
>Greetings
>
>Le sam. 29 juin 2024 à 10:46, Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> a écrit :
>> binNMUs are now done, next thing is to get python3-defaults migrating,
>> filing bug reports and fixing for all the failed autopkg tests triggered
>> by https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python3-defaults
>>
>> plus looking at the messages on the same page like
>>
>> migrating python3/3.12.2-1/amd64 to testing makes FOO uninstallable
>>
>> and fixing those.
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15976

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Scott,

On Saturday, June 29, 2024 8:58:09 AM MST Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I would say no.  Distutils is going to be with us for quite some time, even
> though it's no longer part of the standard distribution.
> 
> Scott K

Can you please elaborate on this some more?  As a maintainer of a couple of 
packages that use distutils in some fashion I would appreciate understanding 
the detail of what is happening with distutils in Debian.

-- 
Soren Stoutner
soren@debian.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15977 — Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT)

Am 29.06.24 um 19:36 schrieb Soren Stoutner:
> Scott,
> 
> On Saturday, June 29, 2024 8:58:09 AM MST Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> I would say no.  Distutils is going to be with us for quite some time, even
>> though it's no longer part of the standard distribution.
>>
>> Scott K
> 
> Can you please elaborate on this some more?  As a maintainer of a couple of
> packages that use distutils in some fashion I would appreciate understanding
> the detail of what is happening with distutils in Debian.

A lot of packages in the archive are depending on distutils but do not 
see any upstream updates over years.
We could manage a migration to another Python build system "somehow", 
but then I think the time until the freeze is to short to fix all these 
packages if we wanted to drop distutils, beside the other work that is 
needed to be done until the hard freeze.

-- 
Regards
Carsten

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15979 — Re: Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2024-06-29 19:42:13 +0200 (+0200), Carsten Schoenert wrote:
[...]
> We could manage a migration to another Python build system
> "somehow", but then I think the time until the freeze is to short
> to fix all these packages if we wanted to drop distutils, beside
> the other work that is needed to be done until the hard freeze.

What's the reasoning for a hard push to stop using distutils when
it's shipped as part of python3-setuptools these days? I've seen no
indication from the SetupTools developers that they intend to stop
maintaining it any time soon. Sure it was removed from the CPython
stdlib, but that's simply because CPython itself no longer relies on
it for building. The idea was that it would be better maintained
outside of the stdlib as part of an independent packaging library.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15982 — Re: Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT)

Here I was precisely asking about the remaining open 46 bugs [0]
that ask to remove the (mostly stale) "python3-distutils" dependencies.

python3-distutils has been removed from Ubuntu since 24.04 [1]
and a lot of these 46 packages carry there these single line patch: [2]
while some Debian packages are not in Ubuntu at all too.

Making these bugs RC now seems like a reasonable idea.

[0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=python3.12;users=debian-python@lists.debian.org;include=subject%3Adistutils
[1] https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=python3-distutils
[2] https://patches.ubuntu.com/d/docker-pycreds/docker-pycreds_0.3.0-1.1ubuntu1.patch

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15989 — Re: Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 10:08:46PM +0200, Alexandre Detiste wrote:
> Here I was precisely asking about the remaining open 46 bugs [0]
> that ask to remove the (mostly stale) "python3-distutils" dependencies.
> 
> python3-distutils has been removed from Ubuntu since 24.04 [1]
> and a lot of these 46 packages carry there these single line patch: [2]
> while some Debian packages are not in Ubuntu at all too.
> 
> Making these bugs RC now seems like a reasonable idea.
Make sense.

I think that we can tackle this (?). Searching this: `python3-distutils path:debian/control`
I found around 90 packages.

I don't know the steps to do this, but I think fill RC bugs and then
propose a migration?

Cheers,
Emmanuel
> 
> [0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=python3.12;users=debian-python@lists.debian.org;include=subject%3Adistutils
> [1] https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=python3-distutils
> [2] https://patches.ubuntu.com/d/docker-pycreds/docker-pycreds_0.3.0-1.1ubuntu1.patch
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15990 — Re: Finalize Python 3.12. migration (Re: Proposal IRC meeting DPT)

Le lun. 1 juil. 2024 à 00:09, Emmanuel Arias <eamanu@debian.org> a écrit :
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 10:08:46PM +0200, Alexandre Detiste wrote:
> > Here I was precisely asking about the remaining open 46 bugs [0]
> > that ask to remove the (mostly stale) "python3-distutils" dependencies.
>
> > Making these bugs RC now seems like a reasonable idea.
> Make sense.
>
> I think that we can tackle this (?). Searching this: `python3-distutils path:debian/control`
> I found around 90 packages.
>
> I don't know the steps to do this, but I think fill RC bugs and then

Graham filled these bugs back then, but I raised the severity.

I have this script [s] but it seems it gives me false positives.

An official transition tracker would be easier for everyone.
(it uses the "ben" syntax/tool too underneath)
   https://release.debian.org/transitions/

I fixed the one Orphaned package: it was easy ;-)
 https://sources.debian.org/src/djvubind/1.2.1-6/debian/patches/remove-distutils.patch/

[s]
#!/bin/sh
Sources=/var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.be.debian.org_debian_dists_unstable_*_source_Sources
Packages=/var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.be.debian.org_debian_dists_unstable_*_binary-amd64_Packages
ben query '.build-depends ~ "python3-distutils"' $Sources -s Package,Maintainer
ben query '.build-depends-indep ~ "python3-distutils"' $Sources -s
Package,Maintainer
ben query '.depends ~ "python3-distutils"' $Packages -s Package,Maintainer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15978

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Saturday, June 29, 2024 1:36:41 PM EDT Soren Stoutner wrote:
> Scott,
> 
> On Saturday, June 29, 2024 8:58:09 AM MST Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > I would say no.  Distutils is going to be with us for quite some time,
> > even
> > though it's no longer part of the standard distribution.
> > 
> > Scott K
> 
> Can you please elaborate on this some more?  As a maintainer of a couple of
> packages that use distutils in some fashion I would appreciate understanding
> the detail of what is happening with distutils in Debian.

I can't say for sure.  I am assuming we will keep it in Debian in the short 
term independent of the Python interpreter packages, since removing it would 
break so many other packages.  

According to codesearch.d.n over 600 packages reference disutils in their 
code.  That doesn't mean that they all use it, but it's a lot of packages.

I think it's smart to work with upstreams to migrate away from it ASAP, since 
it isn't going to stick around forever, but I don't know the timeline.

Of course, if no one volunteers to do the work to seperate it out of python3-
stdlib-extensions, then it might come up pretty soon.  Is anyone planning on 
working on this (I confess I thought someone already had).

Scott K

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15980

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Thanks for the followup information.

For reference, one of the packages I maintain, electrum, only uses one command from 
distutils, which compares version numbers to determine if there is a new upstream release.  
Upstream decided to simply incorporate that distutils file with that one command into their 
own codebase and maintain it themselves going forward.  The code itself needs little 
modifications over time, so it shouldn’t be too difficult for them to maintain it.

The other packages I work on that use distutils are qtwebengine-opensource-src and qt6-
webengine.  qtwebengine-opensource-src is version 5 of Qt WebEngine.  Qt WebEngine is a 
highly-modified fork of Chromium.  Chromium contains distutils, which I believe it is only 
used as part of the developer tools that inspects web pages.  They are actively working on 
removing the dependency on distutils.

https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40283283[1]

Once Chromium has removed distutils, this will eventually filter down to a future qt6-
webengine release.  qtwebengine-opensource-src is EOL, and is unlikely to receive an 
upstream change that removes distutils, but once Debian transitions to KDE 6 as the 
default, qtwebengine-opensource-src probably won’t be an issue anymore.

On Saturday, June 29, 2024 11:29:06 AM MST Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Saturday, June 29, 2024 1:36:41 PM EDT Soren Stoutner wrote:
> > Scott,
> > 
> > On Saturday, June 29, 2024 8:58:09 AM MST Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > > I would say no.  Distutils is going to be with us for quite some time,
> > > even
> > > though it's no longer part of the standard distribution.
> > > 
> > > Scott K
> > 
> > Can you please elaborate on this some more?  As a maintainer of a couple of
> > packages that use distutils in some fashion I would appreciate understanding
> > the detail of what is happening with distutils in Debian.
> 
> I can't say for sure.  I am assuming we will keep it in Debian in the short
> term independent of the Python interpreter packages, since removing it would
> break so many other packages.
> 
> According to codesearch.d.n over 600 packages reference disutils in their
> code.  That doesn't mean that they all use it, but it's a lot of packages.
> 
> I think it's smart to work with upstreams to migrate away from it ASAP, since
> it isn't going to stick around forever, but I don't know the timeline.
> 
> Of course, if no one volunteers to do the work to seperate it out of python3-
> stdlib-extensions, then it might come up pretty soon.  Is anyone planning on
> working on this (I confess I thought someone already had).
> 
> Scott K


-- 
Soren Stoutner
soren@debian.org

--------
[1] https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40283283

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15985

On 2024-06-29 2 h 29 p.m., Scott Kitterman wrote:
> According to codesearch.d.n over 600 packages reference disutils in their
> code.  That doesn't mean that they all use it, but it's a lot of packages.

FWIW, I wrote a lintian tag to flag these packages:

https://udd.debian.org/lintian-tag.cgi?tag=uses-python-distutils

-- 
   ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
   ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Louis-Philippe Véronneau
   ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋   pollo@debian.org / veronneau.org
   ⠈⠳⣄

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15992

On 29.06.24 20:29, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Saturday, June 29, 2024 1:36:41 PM EDT Soren Stoutner wrote:
>> Scott,
>>
>> On Saturday, June 29, 2024 8:58:09 AM MST Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> I would say no.  Distutils is going to be with us for quite some time,
>>> even
>>> though it's no longer part of the standard distribution.
>>>
>>> Scott K
>>
>> Can you please elaborate on this some more?  As a maintainer of a couple of
>> packages that use distutils in some fashion I would appreciate understanding
>> the detail of what is happening with distutils in Debian.
> 
> I can't say for sure.  I am assuming we will keep it in Debian in the short
> term independent of the Python interpreter packages, since removing it would
> break so many other packages.

short time meaning, that we will remove it once we are stopping to have 
3.11 as a supported version, which is usually as the final step of a 
python transition.  Please note, that python3-distutils has not been 
available for 3.12 at any time.

> According to codesearch.d.n over 600 packages reference disutils in their
> code.  That doesn't mean that they all use it, but it's a lot of packages.

this analysis is not good enough. it probably includes all stuff that 
can be used with the distutils included in setuptools.

> I think it's smart to work with upstreams to migrate away from it ASAP, since
> it isn't going to stick around forever, but I don't know the timeline.
> 
> Of course, if no one volunteers to do the work to seperate it out of python3-
> stdlib-extensions, then it might come up pretty soon.  Is anyone planning on
> working on this (I confess I thought someone already had).

it will be removed once we stop having 3.11 as a supported Python version.

Matthias

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15993

On July 1, 2024 6:08:31 PM UTC, Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> wrote:
>On 29.06.24 20:29, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> On Saturday, June 29, 2024 1:36:41 PM EDT Soren Stoutner wrote:
>>> Scott,
>>> 
>>> On Saturday, June 29, 2024 8:58:09 AM MST Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>>> I would say no.  Distutils is going to be with us for quite some time,
>>>> even
>>>> though it's no longer part of the standard distribution.
>>>> 
>>>> Scott K
>>> 
>>> Can you please elaborate on this some more?  As a maintainer of a couple of
>>> packages that use distutils in some fashion I would appreciate understanding
>>> the detail of what is happening with distutils in Debian.
>> 
>> I can't say for sure.  I am assuming we will keep it in Debian in the short
>> term independent of the Python interpreter packages, since removing it would
>> break so many other packages.
>
>short time meaning, that we will remove it once we are stopping to have 3.11 as a supported version, which is usually as the final step of a python transition.  Please note, that python3-distutils has not been available for 3.12 at any time.
>
>> According to codesearch.d.n over 600 packages reference disutils in their
>> code.  That doesn't mean that they all use it, but it's a lot of packages.
>
>this analysis is not good enough. it probably includes all stuff that can be used with the distutils included in setuptools.
>
>> I think it's smart to work with upstreams to migrate away from it ASAP, since
>> it isn't going to stick around forever, but I don't know the timeline.
>> 
>> Of course, if no one volunteers to do the work to seperate it out of python3-
>> stdlib-extensions, then it might come up pretty soon.  Is anyone planning on
>> working on this (I confess I thought someone already had).
>
>it will be removed once we stop having 3.11 as a supported Python version.

Can python3-setuptools Provide: python3-distutils?

That would reduce the number of packages that have to be touched?

Scott K

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web