On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 09:00 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 07:55:40AM +0100, ghisv...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > I suppose the main module is still named "matplotlib" not > > > > "matplotlib3" in version 3 onwards? So using python3- > > > > matplotlib3 > > > > would > > > > be a breach of policy. > > > > > > Probably. > > > > Described in Section 2.2 of the Debian Python policy. > > Depending how heavy Steffen would volunteer to patch and also rename > the > module (which I would not consider a very sensible idea).
Which means future packages depending on matplotlib v3+ would have to be manually patched to account for the renaming. Sounds impractical to me. > > > I'm not sure what might be the difference between: > > > > > > 3.0.0 Stable version > > > 2.2.3 LTS LTS version > > > > > > We have some months left until freeze so may be right now it is > > > not > > > to > > > late to package what upstream considers stable. > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > > > Andreas. > > > From the upstream homepage: "Matplotlib 3.0 is Python 3 only." > > > > Afaik, Python 2 is still considered relevant for the Buster release > > cycle. Hence why I am suggesting to wait for the next release cycle > > before upgrading key scientific packages, such as matplotlib, to > > Python > > 3 only. > > Right. This would surely kick several scientific packages. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. Indeed. Note that NumPy has already published plans to become Python 3 only in the near future, so the deprecation of Python 2 in the scientific stack will happen eventually. I just don't think it should be rushed into the Buster release cycle. Ghis