Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #13738 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-11-28 20:20 +0100 |
| Last post | 2021-11-28 23:10 +0100 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Bug#999415: transition: pandas 1.1 -> 1.3 - to unstable now or not? "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2021-11-28 20:20 +0100
Bug#999415: transition: pandas 1.1 -> 1.3 - to unstable now or not? Scott Talbert <swt@techie.net> - 2021-11-28 23:10 +0100
| From | "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-11-28 20:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Bug#999415: transition: pandas 1.1 -> 1.3 - to unstable now or not? |
| Message-ID | <DoxSq-7RP-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
After build-testing about half of the reverse dependencies, failures that look new-pandas-related are cfgrib #1000726, joypy #1000727, python-skbio #1000752, and maybe hyperspy (not filed yet). python-skbio and hyperspy already FTBFS for unrelated reasons (but fail more tests with new pandas), and joypy looks trivially fixable. Given this and expecting to find a similar number in the other half, against pandas 1.3 working on python3.10 while 1.1 doesn't (#1000422), would you prefer to have pandas 1.3 in unstable now, or not?
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Scott Talbert <swt@techie.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-11-28 23:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DoAnf-KX-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #13738 |
On Sun, 28 Nov 2021, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > After build-testing about half of the reverse dependencies, failures that > look new-pandas-related are cfgrib #1000726, joypy #1000727, python-skbio > #1000752, and maybe hyperspy (not filed yet). > > python-skbio and hyperspy already FTBFS for unrelated reasons (but fail more > tests with new pandas), and joypy looks trivially fixable. > > Given this and expecting to find a similar number in the other half, against > pandas 1.3 working on python3.10 while 1.1 doesn't (#1000422), would you > prefer to have pandas 1.3 in unstable now, or not? My vote would be: go for it, but then again, I don't maintain any of pandas BDs. Thanks, Scott
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python
csiph-web