Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed9.news.xs4all.nl!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Pierre-Elliott =?UTF-8?Q?B=C3=A9cue?= Newsgroups: linux.debian.bugs.dist,linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Bug#1003567: Please make a separate package for mistune 2.x Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 23:40:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-bugs-dist-request@lists.debian.org Thu Feb 3 22:39:09 2022 Old-Return-Path: X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.9 Reply-To: Pierre-Elliott =?UTF-8?Q?B=C3=A9cue?= , 1003567@bugs.debian.org Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org Resent-Cc: Debian Python Team X-Debian-Pr-Message: followup 1003567 X-Debian-Pr-Package: python3-schema-salad X-Debian-Pr-Source: python-schema-salad User-Agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Debian-Message: from BTS X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1703459 List-ID: List-URL: Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 100 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: 1003567@bugs.debian.org, debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Original-Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 23:34:26 +0100 X-Original-Message-ID: <878rurbmr3.fsf@jaatynyt> X-Original-References: <20220111213844.BE33D2C006E@pimeys.fr> <20220111213844.BE33D2C006E@pimeys.fr> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.bugs.dist:1091980 linux.debian.maint.python:13913 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Michael, "Michael R. Crusoe" wrote on 24/01/2022 at 11:39:23+010= 0: > [[PGP Signed Part:No public key for 3C26763F6C67E6E2 created at 2022-01-2= 4T11:39:23+0100 using RSA]] > On Tue, 11 Jan 2022 22:38:44 +0100 peb@debian.org wrote: >> Package: python3-schema-salad >> Severity: wishlist >> >> Dear maintainer, >> >> Your package python3-schema-salad depends on python3-mistune 0.8.4 >> which is no longer maintained and deprecated in favour of version >> 2.0.0. >> >> As python3-mistune 2.0.0 is not backward compatible, I reverted the >> upload of it that I did in unstable and python3-mistune 0.8.4 will >> stay around a bit longer. >> >> In the meantime, please try to see if upstream of >> python3-schema-salad either released a version that is compatible >> with python3-mistune 2.0.0 or if python3-schema-salad can easily be >> fixed to support such a version. As soon as you're ready to upload >> your package please update this bug report and we'll try to >> coordinate so that I release python3-mistune at a time that is fit >> for you to also release python3-schema-salad. > > Dear Pierre-Elliott B=C3=A9cue, > > Thank you for trying to find a way forward in this mess. I am also the > upstream maintainer for schema-salad. We have yet to find a way to=20 > support mistune 2.x > > Here is our attempt so far: > > https://github.com/common-workflow-language/schema_salad/pull/496/files?s= hort_path=3D5c6a130#diff-5c6a1301c6b59b30a040d747d065e861d3dd98bde0e5a4356d= 92d594e9835986 > > And an issue I opened with mistune directly about a regression in > multi-line list handling that goes against multiple markdown specs:=20 > https://github.com/lepture/mistune/issues/296 > > We have not decided if we will switch to another library, wait for a > fixed mistune 2.x release, or keep with the older version. > >> I intend to upload src:mistune 2.0.0 to unstable between March the > >> 15th and April the 15th (depending on the progress of its >> reverse-dependencies). I'll raise the severity of this bug >> approximately a month before making such an upload. > > Since Mistune 2.0.0 regresses its support for standard markdown, I ask > that a separate package be made for mistune 2.x to give more time for=20 > mistune 0.8.x users to migrate to mistune 2.x or another library entirely. > > Cheers, I'm not formally against it, but it's not really standard in my opinion. It'd lead to maintenance of two packages, probably on some long term (as it'd relieve the pressure to migrate for maintainers of reverse-deps of mistune). Besides, having a source package named "mistune2" while upstream's package is named "mistune" adds also another layer of complexity. I'd like to have some python team members' opinion on this, and I am not sure to be eager to do it as of now. Cheers! =2D-=20 PEB --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJDBAEBCgAtFiEESYqTBWsFJgT6y8ijKb+g0HkpCsoFAmH8WRAPHHBlYkBkZWJp YW4ub3JnAAoJECm/oNB5KQrKNkcP/34/aTeHTm4cYHqxY4OdjAoytPSFtFFqceb+ uEhGCNdUG9gFl5prJNOBIGS4DU+qj2KJeQkDOaghCRSAuokPeFji7Jhnq4DGU8Qv TbY7tGf5olVqK2uX0f17r//raieil4o5zikwYAJ+3qbi3zfVVwnUpA3tLPW6rCzl gZALxfBPHmkAHQigChqQY1VH3WpeJSpNAP8QILjPRw2CiSGMvXMOia59sYjx4tXm L7I3p8Jk/MVfVGvDFAiSrpi4ENqBpDYYh6bBGoQ3oBvDg9atUpe8lqHBIJrIHEg5 an2uMXi8ZWb1QuHKIRO7BCcM9zb8vyi3dglTP5JsAtBYv8psbKxVLmeo8Ir0Iss8 6gs8jwzuNQCxBosBj1hZAsPuF0vJvREfPxFJgtZHoKO4pIX8ZksfxoJ1WAL2p7f7 MH+yDadNv5++c97MEpFJGUbypI/FSAIKEQUHOfZiVCjMWIDgPfqTATXTGB5A5OV5 ksDTPHINa4Ucmli5trQgsSS1FSBsgQw7w/A0K2Ns1XEQ4+yuDEaxyAbkfFSJkWrX SVJT5dcR0CckuRJeWs6d1YaVmoJU86wepB0a7tmXE82iGzzgbGjfTFQHaLC3m6id CzGEibGOUvf49fjjCcPaI/kcRBVp2jNojzgdv2tl9Prt6RIzoo8t7bmze9cdk6B0 xKADbfn3 =chyU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--