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

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #14786

Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm?

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

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

On 12/22/22 02:21, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> 100% +1  I'm especially concerned about how a clear plan was not
> communicated to other teams--whose work will be broken by the proposed
> transition, were an exception to be granted.
> 
> Debian is not a paragon of community if it makes late, unannounced
> changes that result in a yet-undetermined number of projects being
> dropped from bookworm's release.  If Python 3.11 as the only supported
> version is a release goal, then the freeze schedule would need to be
> modified.
> 
> Regards,
> Nicholas

Hi Nicholas,

While I can agree that it may be harsh, and that some packages wont be 
fixed in time, I can't let you say that there was only 1 month given, 
and that all of this comes as a surprise. We've been talking about this 
since last summer.

On 12/22/22 05:48, M. Zhou wrote:
 > A significant Python performance improvement in 3.11 is good.
 > But note, when python performance has really become an issue,
 > people already have mature solutions, e.g. offloading the
 > performance critical part onto a compiled language.

I don't agree with this either.

I'm running large-ish OpenStack swift clusters, where we run up to 18 
physical nodes as proxies (eating 100s of requests per seconds). Even a 
10% gain would be greatly appreciated for us. There's no "C" improvement 
here, it's fully in Python... I tried running all Swift services over 
uwsgi, but it didn't work well (we reverted this type of setup because 
many things broke).

The fact that a new python process can spawn faster is also really a 
good thing (so that's not only the interpreter pure speed that I would 
like to have).

On 12/22/22 05:48, M. Zhou wrote:
 > Apart from that, package maintainers have their own plans as well.
 > I believe that at the current stage, many people have assumed that
 > the next stable will ship python3.10, and have their packages
 > finalized for freeze already. Making that transition at the current
 > stage will push a number of maintainers into a rush of updating
 > their packages again -- in the worst case, the package upstreams
 > might be not even ready for python 3.11.

Well, that's not the first time we are trying to push the latest 
interpreter close to a release. In fact, this happens on nearly each 
freeze. Yes, sometimes, there's no upstream fixes yet and you have to 
write your own. But that's what we do: we maintain packages... and fix 
bugs when we can.

Since last summer, I fixed maybe about 20 to 30 Python 3.11 issues, 
sometimes with, and sometimes without help from upstream. And I have 
about a dozen more to fix in my TODO (see below). I invite everyone to 
try to do the same, so we can reach that goal.

I also very much would appreciate help on these (which all look like 
probably related to py3.11):

#1026524 ironic-inspector: FTBFS: AttributeError: '_thread.RLock' object 
has no attribute 'is_locked'
#1026547 python-pypowervm: FTBFS: AssertionError: Expected 'warn' to be 
called once. Called 2 times.
#1026549 python-pytest-xprocess: FTBFS: tests failed
#1026591 cinder: FTBFS: make[1]: pyversions: No such file or directory
#1026595 python-murano-pkg-check: FTBFS: TypeError: load_all() missing 1 
required positional argument: 'Loader'
#1026610 horizon: FTBFS: tests failed
#1026691 bandit: FTBFS: TypeError: load() missing 1 required positional 
argument: 'Loader'
#1026693 cloudkitty: FTBFS: touch: cannot touch 
'/<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/debian/cloudkitty-doc/usr/share/doc/cloudkitty-doc/html/_static/toggle.js': 
No such file or directory
#1026702 python-cursive: FTBFS: AttributeError: '_RSAPrivateKey' object 
has no attribute 'signer'
#1026705 python-pecan: FTBFS: E AttributeError: 'code' object has no 
attribute 'co_endlinetable'
#1026707 jenkins-job-builder: FTBFS: E: pybuild pybuild:386: test: 
plugin custom failed with: exit code=1: PYTHON=python3.10 stestr run

BTW, thanks a lot to Lucas Nussbaum for doing the archive rebuilt and 
finding these out early!

To sum-up: while I'm not 100% on the side of breaking things that close 
to a release, and would also feel it very painful if one of the above 
bugs isn't fixed in time, I don't feel like you guys are giving good 
point of argumentation, or a solution to improve the process. Doko 
already explained that switching the interpreter (the hard way) is the 
only viable way to find out the remaining bugs. Do you have a better 
solution in mind?

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

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

Thread

Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> - 2022-12-21 19:30 +0100
  Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2022-12-22 01:20 +0100
    Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Nicholas D Steeves <sten@debian.org> - 2022-12-22 02:30 +0100
      Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? "M. Zhou" <lumin@debian.org> - 2022-12-22 06:10 +0100
      Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2022-12-28 02:00 +0100
        Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2022-12-30 10:30 +0100
          Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2023-01-05 14:00 +0100
            Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2023-01-07 09:10 +0100
              Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Andrius Merkys <merkys@debian.org> - 2023-01-07 09:30 +0100
                Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Andrius Merkys <merkys@debian.org> - 2023-01-09 16:50 +0100
              Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2023-01-16 17:30 +0100
                Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2023-01-17 01:10 +0100
                Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2023-01-17 07:50 +0100
            Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Étienne Mollier <emollier@emlwks999.eu> - 2023-01-10 22:50 +0100
    Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2022-12-22 13:50 +0100
      Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Timo Röhling <roehling@debian.org> - 2022-12-22 14:00 +0100
        Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2022-12-22 19:50 +0100
          Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? "M. Zhou" <lumin@debian.org> - 2022-12-23 00:30 +0100
            Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? "M. Zhou" <lumin@debian.org> - 2022-12-23 00:40 +0100
          Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Graham Inggs <ginggs@debian.org> - 2022-12-26 21:30 +0100
  Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm? Graham Inggs <ginggs@debian.org> - 2022-12-26 21:50 +0100

csiph-web