Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #11024

Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok?

From	ghisvail@gmail.com
Newsgroups	linux.debian.maint.python
Subject	Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok?
Date	2018-10-16 11:20 +0200
Message-ID	<wJtGa-2kV-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <wJrEl-1aA-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <wJrO1-1dS-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <wJsqK-1qy-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <wJsTM-1Po-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <wJtmN-1YR-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 11:45 +0300, Arto Jantunen wrote:
> ghisvail@gmail.com writes:
> > Don't get me wrong, I am all in favour for a modern stack,
> > including
> > Python 3.
> > 
> > However, upgrading NumPy et al. to their Python 3 only versions,
> > introducing new legacy packages for Python 2, and patching the
> > large
> > collection of packages relying on the Python 2 versions of these
> > sounds
> > like a lot of work for the time we have got left in the Buster
> > release
> > cycle.
> 
> In my understanding there is no need to patch any of the reverse
> dependencies. Currently there are binary packages called python-numpy
> and python3-numpy, built from a source package called python-numpy.
> In
> my understanding the proposed change is to keep having the exact same
> binary packages, just built from two different source packages
> (python-numpy and python-numpy-legacy or whatever).

Oh, I see what you mean.

So you'd have:

- src:python-numpy-legacy providing python-numpy (<2.0) only
- src:python-numpy providing python3-numpy (>=2.0) only

Assuming version 2 is when the split happens.

Am I correct?

Ghis

Thread

Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Steffen Möller <steffen.moeller@uni-rostock.de> - 2018-10-15 23:10 +0200
  Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 08:40 +0200
    Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2018-10-16 08:50 +0200
      Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 09:00 +0200
        Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2018-10-16 09:10 +0200
          Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 09:20 +0200
            Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Ole Streicher <olebole@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 10:00 +0200
              Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 10:30 +0200
                Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Arto Jantunen <viiru@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 11:00 +0200
                Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 11:20 +0200
                Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Arto Jantunen <viiru@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 11:30 +0200
                Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Michael Hudson-Doyle <michael.hudson@canonical.com> - 2018-10-16 12:10 +0200
    Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Steffen Möller <steffen.moeller@uni-rostock.de> - 2018-10-16 10:40 +0200
      Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 10:50 +0200
      Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Steffen Möller <steffen_moeller@gmx.de> - 2018-10-16 10:50 +0200
        Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 11:10 +0200
  Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? "W. Martin Borgert" <debacle@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 14:00 +0200
  Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 14:40 +0200

csiph-web