Path: csiph.com!news.dns-netz.com!news.freedyn.net!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Matthias Klose Newsgroups: linux.debian.devel,linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: should Debian add itself to https://python3statement.org ? Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 18:10:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: Ian Jackson , dparsons@debian.org X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org Thu Sep 12 16:06:26 2019 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.7 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -3.5 Old-X-Envelope-From: doko@debian.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/340675 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/928d0e25-4857-6f0d-d3d9-937475fc9508@debian.org Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 44 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Original-Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 18:06:05 +0200 X-Original-Message-ID: <928d0e25-4857-6f0d-d3d9-937475fc9508@debian.org> X-Original-References: <23930.24034.134879.230980@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.devel:93463 linux.debian.maint.python:11801 On 12.09.19 17:01, Ian Jackson wrote: > Drew Parsons writes ("should Debian add itself to https://python3statement.org ?"): >> https://python3statement.org/ is a site documenting the projects which >> are supporting the policy of dropping Python2 to keep Python3 only. > > That statement is a *pledge* to drop support for python2 by the end of > 2020. Have we in fact made such a pledge ? I think I may have missed > the memo that python2 would be removed from bullseye. > > I did some searching and found this > https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2019/07/msg00080.html > which is a sane-looking transition plan but doesn't seem to have a > timeframe and doesn't seem to contemplate removal of the actual > python2 interpreter. > > FTAOD I don't have an opinion about whether bullseye *should* ship > without python2. Obviously dropping it would not be desirable from > users' pov, but maintaining an ancient thing by ourselves would not be > desirable either. I think I trust the Debian Python team to make that > tradeoff. > > But we need to be clear what's going on and communicate early. If > python2 is going out of bullseye then there are a lot of bugs that > should probably be marked rc fairly soon... it's communicated here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=py2removal;users=debian-python@lists.debian.org derived from https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/python2-rm.html (not perfect, we are still missing bug reports). it's way too early to mark all of these as RC. No, it's not yet decided if Python2 will be part of bullseye. But the python command and the unversioned python packages won't be part of bullseye. > > thanks, > Ian. >