Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #11813

Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing?

Path csiph.com!news.dns-netz.com!news.freedyn.net!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.maint.python
Subject Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing?
Date Sun, 15 Sep 2019 14:30:01 +0200
Message-ID <yGBPb-10n-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <yGpuF-13N-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <yGpuF-13N-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <yGyHE-7sE-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Original-To Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer@jelmer.uk>
X-Mailbox-Line From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Sun Sep 15 12:27:05 2019
Old-Return-Path <mapreri@gmail.com>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status No, score=-4.633 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, FOURLA=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.015, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
X-Policyd-Weight NOT_IN_SBL_XBL_SPAMHAUS=-1.5 CL_IP_EQ_HELO_IP=-2 (check from: .gmail. - helo: .mail-ot1-f45.google. - helo-domain: .google.) FROM/MX_MATCHES_HELO(DOMAIN)=-2; rate: -5.5
X-Google-Dkim-Signature v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9dDfPCOStLYt0zHtAM3OX+5OvwzIp2Lurj2hZNHqGLA=; b=rgefbn5RTzCgG3ekfxLxGb4MZpSvuq3PFK3W7b02GS15fWhmNvU63c0TIPe+D1agZ0 oxh7xo54kWzkfeJut7Cjo9gWCtJBl8Fnvt4ErraoqfdQLzCiyIU4Zrjg520TUchvlqbA 4wi5Zi5y3Ue5QKMYEHGHKWEt5U+dOoTmEgFmenWLp3OfIomuS/08fhdm7cWxHYl3JPnO /57arfDbF4x0RqyqjOBMjtKX166MI7gsqcS0bTdVkPbPdnHY7Qwb8Fi1wmn3nQSuNGJt oNMeQt6hiOoZyPVkAudedavdK8bHkRTqTGva/Eo+3uvtUmhv6bHpfOnlR8FDT0/LX351 S1EQ==
X-Gm-Message-State APjAAAXgL/Dk1cvBP9n7DZX+gVw9jhJdQCvEZVhMmDoYcsoO8hgNDBvx yjmbS1Q3qBDtAiZjXKbubWKOtFE7CqA=
X-Google-SMTP-Source APXvYqzirhI3cM10Yir/0+R9X+9pUnK8Df2dov5mdp6g7PbA++ggPTwKx0s3t4eQPKPX0JV8ziouew==
X-Received by 2002:a9d:6952:: with SMTP id p18mr7960268oto.217.1568550408875; Sun, 15 Sep 2019 05:26:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received by 2002:aca:d846:: with SMTP id p67mr8979606oig.144.1568550407731; Sun, 15 Sep 2019 05:26:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version 1.0
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID <CAHKYmeuEkCGjdU5XvOxdfQa9h+KPwdEgQD5C8UrzfZY9gvTUUg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000dd824505929699c3"
X-Mailing-List <debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/17346
List-ID <debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL <https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/CAHKYmeuEkCGjdU5XvOxdfQa9h+KPwdEgQD5C8UrzfZY9gvTUUg@mail.gmail.com
Approved robomod@news.nic.it
Lines 178
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Cc debian-python <debian-python@lists.debian.org>, Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com>
X-Original-Date Sun, 15 Sep 2019 14:26:35 +0200
X-Original-Message-ID <CAHKYmeuEkCGjdU5XvOxdfQa9h+KPwdEgQD5C8UrzfZY9gvTUUg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Original-References <5c8da6a2-309d-d8d8-e773-172a50b6e56e@debian.org> <2926378.PZRHtU5IR0@l5580> <DA3FA0BE-A4C8-41FF-9533-815FBE228603@jelmer.uk>
Xref csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:11813

Show key headers only | View raw


[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Considering that this is bzr we are talking about, a package that is
already entering the graveyard, I think it would be easiest to just disable
the test suite and move on.

But I would be happier it Thomas at least checked the rdeps before dropping
packages, at least evaluating if breaking things is alrightif he really
likes to break packages :/


On Sun, 15 Sep 2019, 11:09 am Jelmer Vernooij, <jelmer@jelmer.uk> wrote:

>
>
> On 15 September 2019 01:15:11 CEST, Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com>
> wrote:
> >On Saturday, September 14, 2019 6:43:13 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> As I wrongly thought python-extras was used only by OpenStack stuff,
> >I
> >> removed Python 2 support for it. Then someone filed a bug against
> >> python-testtools (ScottK, I believe) saying that it became RC.
> >> Therefore, I went ahead and removed Python 2 support for testtools,
> >but
> >> now, this implies that a few packages which I didn't wish to impact
> >are
> >> also RC:
> >>
> >> * bzr-builddeb
> >> * bzr-email
> >> * bzr-fastimport
> >> * bzr-git
> >> * bzr-stats
> >> * bzr-upload
> >> * loggerhead
> >>
> >> So, basically, unfortunately, Bazaar has lost some of its build
> >> dependencies.
> >>
> >> So, I went ahead, and looked what I could do for Bazaar.
> >Unfortunately,
> >> when looking at:
> >> https://launchpad.net/bzr
> >>
> >> I can see no release since January 2016, no daily archive. The last
> >> commit in the bzr repository of bzr is from 2017-03-17.
> >>
> >> Then I went to see how much Python 3 effort would be needed, and I
> >> quickly gave up. It'd be A LOT of work, but nobody seems doing ANY
> >work
> >> on bzr anymore.
> >>
> >> So I wonder: is it time to remove bazaar from Debian? Or is there any
> >> vague plan to make it work with Python 3? If we are to remove it from
> >> Debian, then we'd better do it ASAP.
> >
> >As I understand it, bazaar (bzr) is dead and being replaced by breezy
> >(brz),
> >which is python3 compatible.
> >
> >https://www.breezy-vcs.org/
> >
> >My inference is that anything bzr specific can go, but I'm not involved
> >in
> >either project.
>
> Bzr maintainer / breezy upstream here.
>
> I'm planning to upload transitional packages to trigger upgrades from bzr
> to Breezy.
>
> The packages for that are not ready yet though. Can we undo the dropping
> of python-testtools in the meantime?
>
> Jelmer
>
>

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing? Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2019-09-15 01:20 +0200
  Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing? Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer@jelmer.uk> - 2019-09-15 11:10 +0200
    Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing? Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2019-09-15 14:30 +0200
      Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still a thing? Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer@jelmer.uk> - 2019-09-15 17:40 +0200
      Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still  a thing? Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2019-09-16 00:40 +0200
        Re: Packages depending on python-testtools are now RC: is bzr still  a thing? Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2019-09-16 09:20 +0200
          A possibly easier way to check dependencies for 2Removal? "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2019-09-18 00:20 +0200
            Re: A possibly easier way to check dependencies for 2Removal? Diane Trout <diane@ghic.org> - 2019-09-18 19:40 +0200
            Re: A possibly easier way to check dependencies for 2Removal? "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2019-10-26 20:30 +0200

csiph-web