Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.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: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 17:40:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: Nilesh Patra , Julian Gilbey X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-bugs-dist-request@lists.debian.org Fri Feb 4 16:36:10 2022 Old-Return-Path: X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.899 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: K-9 Mail for Android MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=----O64XN4W05F1TU82BYXDJJQE8ICGTKL Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Debian-Message: from BTS X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1703544 List-ID: List-URL: Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 90 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: "Michael R. Crusoe" , 1003567@bugs.debian.org, debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Original-Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 17:32:55 +0100 X-Original-Message-ID: <9D622FF4-0951-4FB6-B36B-52AB4CE02A70@debian.org> X-Original-References: <20220111213844.BE33D2C006E@pimeys.fr> <878rurbmr3.fsf@jaatynyt> <20220111213844.BE33D2C006E@pimeys.fr> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.bugs.dist:1092049 linux.debian.maint.python:13921 ------O64XN4W05F1TU82BYXDJJQE8ICGTKL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le 4 f=C3=A9vrier 2022 16:57:59 GMT+01:00, Nilesh Patra a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0: >On 2/4/22 9:18 PM, Julian Gilbey wrote: >> Basically, the mistune upstream author has completely messed up on >> this by making what is essentially a completely different package with >> superficially similar functionality but the same name=2E > >True=2E > =20 >> [=2E=2E=2E] >> _mistune=2Epy within the Debian package, >> and have nbconvert do "import nbconvert=2Efilters=2E_mistune as mistune= " >> (see /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/nbconvert/filters/markdown_mistune= =2Epy)=2E >> That seems like an eminently sensible solution to this problem=2E > >But that'd lead to a number of mistune's embedded copies in a huge number= of packages; since majority of >the rev-deps (when I last checked) haven't adapted to this new version=2E= When they do, >and it becomes a overhead to fix each one later=2E >Even worse, if we discover a security problem sometime later, then all su= ch packages would be >effected, and that honestly does not look like a good idea to me=2E > >I somehow do not understand the urgency of uploading this newer version, = as the maintainer said: > >| I intend to upload src:mistune 2=2E0=2E0 to unstable between March the >| 15th and April the 15th (depending on the progress of its >| reverse-dependencies)=2E > >We could simply wait a little more for the dust to settle, IMHO=2E > >Regards, >Nilesh > Because some packages I maintain depend on mistune 2=2Ex and mistune 0=2E8= =2E4 is, whether we like it or not, obsolete=2E I can't really afford to wait for a year to try having mailman3 in testing= again=2E=2E=2E -- Pierre-Elliott B=C3=A9cue From=20my phone ------O64XN4W05F1TU82BYXDJJQE8ICGTKL Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Le 4 f=C3=A9vrier 2022 = 16:57:59 GMT+01:00, Nilesh Patra <nilesh@tchncs=2Ede> a =C3=A9crit=C2= =A0:
On 2/4/22 9:18 PM, Julian Gilbey wrote:=

Basically, the mistune=
 upstream author has completely messed up on
this by making what is esse=
ntially a completely different package with
superficially similar functi=
onality but the same name=2E

True=2E
  
[=2E=2E=2E]
_mistune=2Epy within=
 the Debian package,
and have nbconvert do "import nbconvert=2Efilters=
=2E_mistune as mistune"
(see /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/nbconvert/fi=
lters/markdown_mistune=2Epy)=2E
That seems like an eminently sensible so=
lution to this problem=2E

But that'd lead to a number o= f mistune's embedded copies in a huge number of packages; since majority of=
the rev-deps (when I last checked) haven't adapted to this new version= =2E When they do,
and it becomes a overhead to fix each one later=2E
= Even worse, if we discover a security problem sometime later, then all such= packages would be
effected, and that honestly does not look like a good= idea to me=2E

I somehow do not understand the urgency of uploading = this newer version, as the maintainer said:

| I intend to upload src= :mistune 2=2E0=2E0 to unstable between March the
| 15th and April the 15= th (depending on the progress of its
| reverse-dependencies)=2E

W= e could simply wait a little more for the dust to settle, IMHO=2E

Re= gards,
Nilesh


Because = some packages I maintain depend on mistune 2=2Ex and mistune 0=2E8=2E4 is, = whether we like it or not, obsolete=2E

I can't really afford to wait= for a year to try having mailman3 in testing again=2E=2E=2E
--
Pierre-Elliott B=C3=A9cue
From my phone ------O64XN4W05F1TU82BYXDJJQE8ICGTKL--