Path: csiph.com!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.albasani.net!tahina.priv.at!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Drew Parsons Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: Webpage to track py2removal bugs & packages Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2019 10:50:01 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Mon Sep 2 08:43:53 2019 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.106 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.406] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -3.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: The Debian Project Reply-To: dparsons@debian.org Mail-Reply-To: dparsons@debian.org X-Sender: dparsons@debian.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.8 X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/17253 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/58efbdf7199790cbafe434a92a0ebec9@debian.org Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 31 Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: debian-python X-Original-Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2019 16:43:40 +0800 X-Original-Message-ID: <58efbdf7199790cbafe434a92a0ebec9@debian.org> X-Original-References: <12da2c96d692bd327244a83126302c6c@debian.org> <21864e3e769e0bed0f6f2b6b084367c5@debian.org> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:11737 On 2019-09-02 12:21, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Sun, Sep 1, 2019 at 9:54 PM Drew Parsons > wrote: >> Yes, your script counts the dependencies along one direction (rdeps), >> identifying which packages are ready to be de-python2-ised next. >> >> I'm talking about dependencies in the opposite direction, deps not >> rdeps. Upstream vs downstream. >> >> My question is, of the 844 packages now currently on rdeps=0 and ready >> for processing, which one should be processed first? Which one will >> free up the largest number of upstream packages? Which one gives the >> biggest bang for buck? > > gothca, i hope. > > I've added the number of forward dependencies in the last update to > the webpage; it's not super-accurate (f.e. python dep is counted > twice, due to the nature of how it's produced, > 2.7 < 2.8) but it > should give a general idea of what you asked for Looks great, is plenty enough accurate for the task. It tells us it's more important to process live-task-standard than python-gnatpython-doc. Within a given rdeps count it currently has secondary sorting made on Bug No. It would polish off the forward deps if they could be used for secondary sorting instead (highest number to lowest). Bonus points for making the headers clickable so the reader can choose which secondary sorting is most useful (Bug No. vs Binary Pkg vs Maintainer vs # deps) Drew