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

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #12128

Re: Severity bump script

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

there seems to be disagreement on how to proceed, so for the time
being i suspended the severity bump part of the py2removal tracking
script. let me know when everybody agrees on a solution, and what that
solution is, and i'll code it and re-enable.

regards,
Sandro

On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 6:07 AM Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 03-12-2019 13:19, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > It's unfortunate that issues for some packages only get attention when the
> > severity of an issue is raised.  Following your proposal means that the issue is
> > probably ignored forever, and you don't propose a better way going forward, just
> > saying we should stop earlier.  I don't think that's the correct choice.  For
> > now these seem to be single packages, so please could you name those, and we can
> > look at those with a priority?  That's at least a path that is forward looking,
> > or feel free to propose another approach better than your current proposal for
> > not getting the attention of maintainers.
>
> I guess what I'm asking for could be fulfilled by an announcement to
> d-d-a with a package list (including via which package(s) they are
> affected) attached including the standard grouping by DD. And then some
> time to react.
>
> Paul
>
> PS, my original typed reply below. After having writing it, the idea
> above emerged.
>
> My problem with the current approach is that the way that developers
> learn that they (potentially transitively) (build) depend on a Python 2
> package is by the autoremoval message. I don't think that is acceptable
> socially in the project. My proposal is to give the maintainers about
> those packages a heads up. Via a bug report may be a bit weird in cases,
> but in some cases may be the appropriate thing as the package could work
> around the (build) dependency. At least adding "affects" helps a tiny
> bit and direct e-mails to the maintainers (e.g. via the
> <package>@packages.debian.org address will at least give them a heads
> up. Even if the RM bug is coming eventually.
>
> Again, I don't have a problem with Python 2 removal, even at the price
> of packages that don't care that their dependency is written in Python.
> I do care about proper communication. Using RC severity to trigger
> autoremoval for non-leaf packages just yet is not appropriate in the
> opinion of the release team. Even though I am well aware of the Python 2
> removal effort I can tell from personal experience (cacti) that
> receiving an autoremoval e-mail as the first sign of such a dependency
> isn't nice, that's the problem I'm having and that needs solving in my
> opinion.
>


-- 
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
Twitter: https://twitter.com/sandrotosi

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

Thread

Severity bump script Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2019-11-11 07:50 +0100
  Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-11-11 16:50 +0100
  Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-11-15 01:20 +0100
    Re: Severity bump script Dmitry Shachnev <mitya57@debian.org> - 2019-11-15 19:50 +0100
      Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-11-16 04:10 +0100
    Re: Severity bump script Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2019-11-22 09:40 +0100
      Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-11-22 22:30 +0100
        Re: Severity bump script Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2019-11-27 20:40 +0100
          Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-11-28 04:20 +0100
            Re: Severity bump script Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2019-11-28 13:40 +0100
              Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-11-28 19:10 +0100
                Re: Severity bump script Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2019-11-28 21:00 +0100
  Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-12-01 22:50 +0100
    Re: Severity bump script Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> - 2019-12-02 20:30 +0100
      Re: Severity bump script Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> - 2019-12-02 20:40 +0100
        Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-12-02 22:20 +0100
          Re: Severity bump script Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> - 2019-12-02 22:30 +0100
            Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-12-02 22:50 +0100
            Re: Severity bump script Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2019-12-02 23:40 +0100
        Re: Severity bump script Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2019-12-03 10:40 +0100
      Re: Severity bump script Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2019-12-02 21:00 +0100
      Re: Severity bump script Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2019-12-03 13:30 +0100
        Re: Severity bump script Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> - 2019-12-05 12:10 +0100
          Re: Severity bump script Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-12-08 21:00 +0100
            Proposal on how to proceed with Python 2 removal from bullseye Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> - 2019-12-14 21:00 +0100
              Re: Proposal on how to proceed with Python 2 removal from bullseye Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-12-18 07:10 +0100
                Re: Proposal on how to proceed with Python 2 removal from bullseye Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2019-12-22 12:00 +0100
                Re: Proposal on how to proceed with Python 2 removal from bullseye Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2020-01-07 00:20 +0100

csiph-web