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


Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #13226

Re: Python package situation

Path csiph.com!4.us.feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From Brian May <bam@debian.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.maint.python
Subject Re: Python package situation
Date Wed, 17 Feb 2021 02:10:01 +0100
Message-ID <BJjvP-391-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <BHoJk-6G2-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <BHulH-1CA-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <BJ4Gu-1w5-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <BJfse-7SD-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <BJfVg-8iG-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Original-To debian-python@lists.debian.org
X-Mailbox-Line From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Wed Feb 17 01:02:22 2021
Old-Return-Path <bam@debian.org>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status No, score=-6.207 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RDNS_NONE=0.793] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
X-Policyd-Weight using cached result; rate:hard: -3.5
X-Greylist delayed 582 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at bendel; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 01:02:09 UTC
Organization Debian
MIME-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain
X-Mailing-List <debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/19009
List-ID <debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL <https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/87y2fn7byv.fsf@canidae.wired.pri
Approved robomod@news.nic.it
Lines 36
Sender robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Date Wed, 17 Feb 2021 11:51:52 +1100
X-Original-Message-ID <87y2fn7byv.fsf@canidae.wired.pri>
X-Original-References <20210211181234.GA4829@silverpine> <5c9a9365-20b9-c600-638c-6c74a024779a@debian.org> <s0g2iu$9h1$1@ciao.gmane.io> <YCwvhRb2pWtT91JG@fama> <YCw1boMi/ReDbwOx@belkar.wrar.name>
Xref csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:13226

Show key headers only | View raw


Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@debian.org> writes:

> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 09:48:05PM +0100, Martin wrote:
> Are you asking about testing or stable? Because for stable the "packages
> are either outdated or do not exist" situation is somewhat expected and
> testing is not that interesting case, though even in testing we may have a
> lot of outdated packages.

I believe there are a number of Python packages in Debian unstable that
are out of date in respect to latest upstream.

e.g.

https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=bam%40debian.org&comaint=yes

Somebody needs to do the work to update them. But maybe the fact that
nobody is doing so, might mean that nobody is using them?

The packages which are up-to-date have not been updated by upstream in a
long time, and this isn't necessarily a good thing either.

I personally found a while back that keeping these packages up-to-date
was draining far too much of my time. Time I don't actually have. So I
now use Docker+pip for my applications.

Plus upgrading system packages to fix dependencies always made me
worried I might break something unrelated that I couldn't or wasn't
ready to fix. So most of the time I don't use these packages anymore.

Yes, the idea of the packages being stable in Debian stable, and hence,
won't break anything until you do a release upgrade is a good one. But
if you encounter a bug/missing feature in such a package that breaks
your application, often the only real alternative is to use the latest
version. Often only the latest version is supported by upstream also.
-- 
Brian May <bam@debian.org>

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


Thread

upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Elana Hashman <ehashman@debian.org> - 2021-02-11 19:20 +0100
  Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2021-02-11 19:30 +0100
    Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2021-02-16 05:30 +0100
      Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2021-02-16 17:30 +0100
  Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 01:20 +0100
    Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye stefanor@debian.org - 2021-02-12 01:50 +0100
      Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 09:20 +0100
        Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 09:40 +0100
          Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 10:20 +0100
            Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Martin <debacle@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 11:30 +0100
            Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Christian Kastner <ckk@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 13:20 +0100
            Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Julien Palard <julien@palard.fr> - 2021-02-12 14:10 +0100
              Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 17:40 +0100
              Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2021-02-13 23:10 +0100
            Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 21:20 +0100
        Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 21:00 +0100
          Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Michael Kesper <mkesper@schokokeks.org> - 2021-02-12 21:50 +0100
      Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Tristan Seligmann <mithrandi@mithrandi.net> - 2021-02-12 10:30 +0100
        Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Valentin Vidic <vvidic@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 10:50 +0100
          Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 11:40 +0100
            Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Valentin Vidic <vvidic@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 12:10 +0100
          Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 15:20 +0100
            Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Andrius Merkys <merkys@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 17:00 +0100
              Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Valentin Vidic <vvidic@debian.org> - 2021-02-12 17:20 +0100
    Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Michael Kesper <mkesper@schokokeks.org> - 2021-02-12 11:00 +0100
    Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> - 2021-02-12 18:00 +0100
    Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Bastian Venthur <venthur@debian.org> - 2021-02-16 10:20 +0100
      Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2021-02-16 19:30 +0100
        Re: upstream python concerns, python3-full package for bullseye Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> - 2021-02-16 20:20 +0100
      Python package situation Martin <debacle@debian.org> - 2021-02-16 21:50 +0100
        Re: Python package situation Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2021-02-16 22:20 +0100
          Re: Python package situation Martin <debacle@debian.org> - 2021-02-16 23:20 +0100
          Re: Python package situation Brian May <bam@debian.org> - 2021-02-17 02:10 +0100
            Re: Python package situation Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2021-02-17 08:00 +0100
            Re: Python package situation Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> - 2021-02-17 10:30 +0100

csiph-web