Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com>
Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python
Subject: Re: Python3.8 as default final status
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 07:20:01 +0100
Message-ID: <zPcZ3-8dR-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <zOYW6-7RV-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <zP2wF-1Gj-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <zP2ZI-1Q5-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <zPc30-7BN-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Old-Return-Path: <debian@kitterman.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 59
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:12395



On March 28, 2020 5:10:42 AM UTC, Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@debian=
=2Eorg> wrote:
>On Friday, March 27 2020, H=C3=A5vard Flaget Aasen wrote:
>
>> On 27=2E03=2E2020 20:09, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>>> On Friday, March 27 2020, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> The python3-defaults with python3=2E8 as the default python3 has
>migrated to=20
>>>> Testing thanks to the release team hammering things around until it
>went=2E
>>>=20
>>> Thanks for this=2E
>>>=20
>>>> Most of the outstanding autipkgtest failures with python3=2E8 were
>fixed either=20
>>>> in unstable or in git/BTS=2E  Here are the remaining issues that
>someone (who=20
>>>> isn't me) should have a look at:
>>>>
>>>> celery/4=2E2=2E1-5: #952217 autorm 4/13
>>>=20
>>> FWIW, I looked at this a little bit, but could not make much
>progress=2E
>>> I'm very interested in fixing this since it impacts pagure=2E  I'll
>try to
>>> investigate more this weekend, but if someone else wants to take a
>look
>>> (and let me know), you're more than welcome!
>>>=20
>>
>> I believe I already fixed that package, it's waiting for someone to
>> review and upload it=2E Did you look at the repository in salsa?
>
>I had looked at the repository when I was working with the package=2E
>I see you pushed your changes 2 days ago, but the last time I looked at
>the package was at least 7 days ago=2E
>
>Anyhow, I thank you for letting me know, but I am not sure I am
>satisfied with the solution=2E  You basically disabled the test on Python
>3=2E8, which obviously works, but doesn't really tell me whether there
>was
>indeed a problem with the package/testcase or not=2E

I completely agree=2E  It's just papering over the problem=2E  It's not in=
 the spirit of the Debian Social Contract (#3)=2E

>My approach (failed, so far) was to try and figure out what was
>happening, and then devise a proper fix for it=2E  My next step was going
>to be to involve upstream in this=2E
>
>Would you like to follow up with them and check if they're are aware of
>the failure?  Maybe they already have a proper solution for it=2E

Upstream should definitely be involved=2E

Scott K