Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #11759
| From | Martin Kelly <martin@martingkelly.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.maint.python |
| Subject | Re: Python 3 transition question |
| Date | 2019-09-05 01:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <yCMpP-15W-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <yBE1j-3Nu-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <yBHVf-6hY-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <yBLPc-FI-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <yBMLf-1kA-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <yC0XU-3VN-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 9/2/19 1:18 PM, Martin Kelly wrote: > On 9/1/19 10:07 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: >> >> >> On September 2, 2019 4:00:53 AM UTC, Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> >> wrote: >>>> I would just stop building these. And if the reverse dependencies >>> have a >>>> py2removal bug itself, then comment in these issues that the >>>> suggested/recommended package gets removed. If they don't have a >>> py2removal >>>> bug, please file the bugs for these packages. >>> >>> i dont believe this is a sensible approach; for example i maintain >>> python-mpmath, that would be rendered uninstallable the moment >>> python-gmp2 is removed. Now, python-mpmath has 3 external >>> reverse-dependencies (just to name a couple, sagemath and simpy) that >>> would be then uninstallable, and so on and so forth for all their >>> rdeps. >>> >>> Martin, i think for now the only option is to keep the py2 packages >>> around until we're ready to drop them (ie they have 0 rdeps). >> >> I just checked on packages.d.o and according to it, python-gmp2 is a >> Suggests. Suggests aren't installed with packages. Unless I'm >> missing something, python-mpmath wouldn't become uninstallable. >> >> IIRC, policy doesn't even require Suggests packages to exist. >> >> I agree about keeping packages as long as they have reverse >> Recommends, but I think Suggests is going too far (although AIUI, >> missing Recommends don't make the package uninstallable either). >> >> Scott K >> > > If I'm summarizing correctly, it sounds like there is no policy on > exactly what to do here. I think removing the package would be pretty > bad, because gmpy is designed to speed up numerical libraries, and the > performance hit without it would make many libraries really painful to > use. Given this, perhaps the dependencies should be Recommends instead > of Suggests. > > The guidelines I saw in the bugs filed on my packages (e.g. bug #937791) > say to "document" the reverse dependency. Where do I document this? (ping). I'd like to resolve the bugs I have on my packages and am not sure yet how best to proceed.
Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Python 3 transition question Martin Kelly <martin@martingkelly.com> - 2019-09-01 21:50 +0200
Re: Python 3 transition question Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2019-09-02 02:00 +0200
Re: Python 3 transition question Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2019-09-02 06:10 +0200
Re: Python 3 transition question Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2019-09-02 07:10 +0200
Re: Python 3 transition question Martin Kelly <martin@martingkelly.com> - 2019-09-02 22:20 +0200
Re: Python 3 transition question Martin Kelly <martin@martingkelly.com> - 2019-09-05 01:00 +0200
csiph-web