Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Miro Hrončok wrote: > Once more: The one package you keep talking about stays. The python2 package stays, but we have to jump through completely unreasonable hoops to be allowed to actually use it. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list --

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On 15. 08. 19 14:33, Kevin Kofler wrote: What is more work: maintaining one compatibility package, or porting hundreds of packages (which are not getting ported upstream for whatever reason) to the new incompatible version? Once more: The one package you keep talking about stays. -- Miro

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > I've been seeing migrations like this for d decades, with major > releases of many software tools. Preserving legacy versions, forever, > is the precise opposite of "scalable". What is more work: maintaining one compatibility package, or porting hundreds of packages

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 4:31 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > > David Sommerseth wrote: > > Instead of spending time and resources keeping old stuff alive longer than > > needed, rather spend that energy on porting the old Python 2 over to > > Python 3. In the long run, this will result in far less work

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 at 16:31, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > David Sommerseth wrote: > > Instead of spending time and resources keeping old stuff alive longer than > > needed, rather spend that energy on porting the old Python 2 over to > > Python 3. In the long run, this will result in far less work

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On 14. 08. 19 22:28, Kevin Kofler wrote: It is not practical to get all the legacy Python 2 code ported over to Python 3. Keeping Python 2 (or something backwards-compatible with it such as Tauthon) available is actually the much more scalable approach. We are keeping the Python 2 interpreter.

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

David Sommerseth wrote: > Instead of spending time and resources keeping old stuff alive longer than > needed, rather spend that energy on porting the old Python 2 over to > Python 3. In the long run, this will result in far less work over time. It is not practical to get all the legacy Python 2

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On 14/08/2019 15:01, Kevin Kofler wrote: > David Sommerseth wrote: >> Like it or not, Python 2 is going to die: >> >> >> Python 2 will not be maintained by upstream after January 1, 2020. Python >> 2 will go EOL during the lifetime of Fedora 31. > > So

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

David Sommerseth wrote: > Like it or not, Python 2 is going to die: > > > Python 2 will not be maintained by upstream after January 1, 2020. Python > 2 will go EOL during the lifetime of Fedora 31. So what? Qt 3 had its last release (3.3.8b) in 2008

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Peter Robinson wrote: > So why do package maintainers have to do a whole lot of extra work to > keep a package that has already been approved in the distro. There's a > lot of work going into various stacks upstream for python3 work but in > a lot of cases the time available is split and now we're

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On 11/08/2019 01:45, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> My opinion at least postpone this decision one or two releases to >> Fedors 33/34 , many things still just work with python 2 . > > I second that wholeheartedly. Like it or not, Python 2 is going to die:

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 9:33 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 11. 08. 19 3:45, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > >> Maintaining python 2 requires maintaining a*lot* of infrastructure. > > What kind of infrastructure do you need to maintain a package that is (will > > be) no longer

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Hi, On 13-08-19 16:31, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Dne 12. 08. 19 v 13:34 Hans de Goede napsal(a): gcompris has been replaced upstream by gcompris-qt, which is also in Fedora and which we will keep around. Imho gcompris should have been remove long time ago from Fedora. And Gcompris-qt should

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Dne 12. 08. 19 v 13:34 Hans de Goede napsal(a): > > gcompris has been replaced upstream by gcompris-qt, which is also in > Fedora and which we will keep around. Imho gcompris should have been remove long time ago from Fedora. And Gcompris-qt should obsolete-provides gcompris. It just confuse

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Hi, On 11-08-19 01:05, Sérgio Basto wrote: Hi, Why we would retire childsplay or gcompris or gdesklets ? IMHO we still haven't a replacement . childsplay and gcompris maintainer here. Childsplay has been in a zombie state upstream for years, some work has been done upstream but mostly

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On 8/11/19 2:28 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Miro Hrončok wrote: We are still planning to maintain the interpreter. As is documented in the change. So can we please stop arguing about maintaining the interpreter over and over? It is staying and our team will maintain it at least until RHEL 7 EOL,

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Miro Hrončok wrote: > We are still planning to maintain the interpreter. As is documented in the > change. So can we please stop arguing about maintaining the interpreter > over and over? It is staying and our team will maintain it at least until > RHEL 7 EOL, possibly longer. Then why do you

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 4:33 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > I also think that there ought to be more cooperation from the maintainers of > > individual python2-* modules. The approved Fedora 31 Change makes it way too > > easy for maintainers to just drop Python 2 support for no reason. > > When a

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On 11. 08. 19 3:45, Kevin Kofler wrote: Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: Maintaining python 2 requires maintaining a*lot* of infrastructure. What kind of infrastructure do you need to maintain a package that is (will be) no longer updated upstream? This takes almost no work. The only thing to do is

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > Maintaining python 2 requires maintaining a *lot* of infrastructure. What kind of infrastructure do you need to maintain a package that is (will be) no longer updated upstream? This takes almost no work. The only thing to do is to backport some security fixes from

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 7:47 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Why we would retire childsplay or gcompris or gdesklets ? IMHO we still > > haven't a replacement . > > > > From [1] I strongly disagree with the text, why all python 2 packages > > will be removed automatically and

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On Sun, 2019-08-11 at 01:35 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 11. 08. 19 1:05, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Why we would retire childsplay or gcompris or gdesklets ? IMHO we > > still > > haven't a replacement . > > If the maintainer wants to, they can request an exception for the > package

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Sérgio Basto wrote: > Why we would retire childsplay or gcompris or gdesklets ? IMHO we still > haven't a replacement . > > From [1] I strongly disagree with the text, why all python 2 packages > will be removed automatically and why I would have a lot of work if I > want keep one package alive

Re: Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

On 11. 08. 19 1:05, Sérgio Basto wrote: Hi, Why we would retire childsplay or gcompris or gdesklets ? IMHO we still haven't a replacement . If the maintainer wants to, they can request an exception for the package to be kept. From [1] I strongly disagree with the text, why all python 2

Why retire Python 2 packages and games that still work to end user ?

Hi, Why we would retire childsplay or gcompris or gdesklets ? IMHO we still haven't a replacement . From [1] I strongly disagree with the text, why all python 2 packages will be removed automatically and why I would have a lot of work if I want keep one package alive . why not the opposite ? .