Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 18/04/2024 07:01, Ake Rehnman wrote: Den tors 28 mars 2024 kl 18:50 skrev Jon Turney : On 24/03/2024 17:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote: On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: I assume you are OK with the removal of python 3.5 (EOL Sept 2020) and 3.6 (EOL Dec 2021)? (I'm still dealing with cleaning up the final pieces of python27 detritus, but these should hopefully be much smaller tasks) nothing should depend from 3.5 not sure for 3.6 I've automated some of the analysis I was doing for python2 packages and the results are now available at [1]. So yeah, it looks like nothing uses 3.5. There are just a couple of packages using 3.6, I guess I'll ping the maintainers about those. [1] https://cygwin.com/packages/reports/python_rebuilds.html Ake, Hi Jon, sorry for the late reply. No problem. Is it possible to update/rebuild libftdi1, which only publishes python bindings for the soon-to-be removed python36? I am not sure, I have not looked at it for so many years, I have not even used cygwin since I don't remember... (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this package, which will probably lead to it's removal). Do you have any stats on how many installs it was last year? I'm afraid we don't collect that information. If you are not using it anymore, it seems like the logical thing to do is orphan this package (and libconfuse, it's dependency, your only other package). Thanks for your work in the past.
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 13:46:18 +0100 Jon Turney wrote: > On 02/04/2024 15:58, Takashi Yano via Cygwin-apps wrote: > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 15:38:25 +0100 > > Jon Turney wrote: > >> On 01/04/2024 18:16, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: > >>> On 3/30/2024 8:25 AM, Jon Turney wrote: > On 29/03/2024 18:32, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: > > On 3/28/2024 10:50 AM, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: > [...] > >> David, > >> > >> Is it possible to update/rebuild rdiff-backup, which replies upon > >> the soon-to-be removed python36? > >> > >> (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this > >> package, which will probably lead to it's removal). > > > > Please remove me as the maintainer from that package. I no longer use > > it, and no longer have an environment for building packages for Cygwin. > > No problem. Thanks for maintaining it in the past. > > Is the same true for your other packages? > > $ grep Rothenberger cygwin-pkg-maint | grep -v ORPHANED > cyrus-sasl David Rothenberger > flac David Rothenberger > libao David Rothenberger > libapr1 David Rothenberger > libaprutil1 David Rothenberger > libkate David Rothenberger > libogg David Rothenberger > librsync David Rothenberger > libtheora David Rothenberger > libvorbis David Rothenberger > rdiff-backup David Rothenberger > speex David Rothenberger > speexdsp David Rothenberger > vorbis-tools David Rothenberger > which David Rothenberger > whois David Rothenberger > >>> > >>> Yes, I'm afraid it is. > >> > >> Done. Thanks for all your work on these in the past. > > > > Hi, I would like to take over the maintenance of: > flac David Rothenberger > libao David Rothenberger > libogg David Rothenberger > libtheora David Rothenberger > libvorbis David Rothenberger > speex David Rothenberger > speexdsp David Rothenberger > vorbis-tools David Rothenberger > > if anyone would not. > > > > Thanks. I added these to your packages. Thanks! > I generated missing packaging history repos for some of these from the > CTM history. Please let me know if there's any errors or if you'd like > those removed. > > I didn't check, but if any of these are no longer carried by recent > linux distros, maybe think about if it's actually useful to keep on > having a package for it... All these packages are required by my other packages such as ffmpeg, timidity++, pulseaudio, etc. except for vorbis-tools. Also, these still exist in fedora rpms repos. -- Takashi Yano
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 02/04/2024 15:58, Takashi Yano via Cygwin-apps wrote: On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 15:38:25 +0100 Jon Turney wrote: On 01/04/2024 18:16, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 3/30/2024 8:25 AM, Jon Turney wrote: On 29/03/2024 18:32, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 3/28/2024 10:50 AM, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: [...] David, Is it possible to update/rebuild rdiff-backup, which replies upon the soon-to-be removed python36? (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this package, which will probably lead to it's removal). Please remove me as the maintainer from that package. I no longer use it, and no longer have an environment for building packages for Cygwin. No problem. Thanks for maintaining it in the past. Is the same true for your other packages? $ grep Rothenberger cygwin-pkg-maint | grep -v ORPHANED cyrus-sasl David Rothenberger flac David Rothenberger libao David Rothenberger libapr1 David Rothenberger libaprutil1 David Rothenberger libkate David Rothenberger libogg David Rothenberger librsync David Rothenberger libtheora David Rothenberger libvorbis David Rothenberger rdiff-backup David Rothenberger speex David Rothenberger speexdsp David Rothenberger vorbis-tools David Rothenberger which David Rothenberger whois David Rothenberger Yes, I'm afraid it is. Done. Thanks for all your work on these in the past. Hi, I would like to take over the maintenance of: flac David Rothenberger libao David Rothenberger libogg David Rothenberger libtheora David Rothenberger libvorbis David Rothenberger speex David Rothenberger speexdsp David Rothenberger vorbis-tools David Rothenberger if anyone would not. Thanks. I added these to your packages. I generated missing packaging history repos for some of these from the CTM history. Please let me know if there's any errors or if you'd like those removed. I didn't check, but if any of these are no longer carried by recent linux distros, maybe think about if it's actually useful to keep on having a package for it...
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 15:38:25 +0100 Jon Turney wrote: > On 01/04/2024 18:16, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: > > On 3/30/2024 8:25 AM, Jon Turney wrote: > >> On 29/03/2024 18:32, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: > >>> On 3/28/2024 10:50 AM, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: > >> [...] > David, > > Is it possible to update/rebuild rdiff-backup, which replies upon > the soon-to-be removed python36? > > (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this > package, which will probably lead to it's removal). > >>> > >>> Please remove me as the maintainer from that package. I no longer use > >>> it, and no longer have an environment for building packages for Cygwin. > >> > >> No problem. Thanks for maintaining it in the past. > >> > >> Is the same true for your other packages? > >> > >> $ grep Rothenberger cygwin-pkg-maint | grep -v ORPHANED > >> cyrus-sasl David Rothenberger > >> flac David Rothenberger > >> libao David Rothenberger > >> libapr1 David Rothenberger > >> libaprutil1 David Rothenberger > >> libkate David Rothenberger > >> libogg David Rothenberger > >> librsync David Rothenberger > >> libtheora David Rothenberger > >> libvorbis David Rothenberger > >> rdiff-backup David Rothenberger > >> speex David Rothenberger > >> speexdsp David Rothenberger > >> vorbis-tools David Rothenberger > >> which David Rothenberger > >> whois David Rothenberger > > > > Yes, I'm afraid it is. > > Done. Thanks for all your work on these in the past. Hi, I would like to take over the maintenance of: > >> flac David Rothenberger > >> libao David Rothenberger > >> libogg David Rothenberger > >> libtheora David Rothenberger > >> libvorbis David Rothenberger > >> speex David Rothenberger > >> speexdsp David Rothenberger > >> vorbis-tools David Rothenberger if anyone would not. Thanks in advance. -- Takashi Yano
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 01/04/2024 18:16, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 3/30/2024 8:25 AM, Jon Turney wrote: On 29/03/2024 18:32, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 3/28/2024 10:50 AM, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: [...] David, Is it possible to update/rebuild rdiff-backup, which replies upon the soon-to-be removed python36? (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this package, which will probably lead to it's removal). Please remove me as the maintainer from that package. I no longer use it, and no longer have an environment for building packages for Cygwin. No problem. Thanks for maintaining it in the past. Is the same true for your other packages? $ grep Rothenberger cygwin-pkg-maint | grep -v ORPHANED cyrus-sasl David Rothenberger flac David Rothenberger libao David Rothenberger libapr1 David Rothenberger libaprutil1 David Rothenberger libkate David Rothenberger libogg David Rothenberger librsync David Rothenberger libtheora David Rothenberger libvorbis David Rothenberger rdiff-backup David Rothenberger speex David Rothenberger speexdsp David Rothenberger vorbis-tools David Rothenberger which David Rothenberger whois David Rothenberger Yes, I'm afraid it is. Done. Thanks for all your work on these in the past. Please accept this virtual gold-plated solid 1/10th-scale pocket watch as a token of our appreciation!
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 3/30/2024 8:25 AM, Jon Turney wrote: On 29/03/2024 18:32, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 3/28/2024 10:50 AM, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: [...] David, Is it possible to update/rebuild rdiff-backup, which replies upon the soon-to-be removed python36? (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this package, which will probably lead to it's removal). Please remove me as the maintainer from that package. I no longer use it, and no longer have an environment for building packages for Cygwin. No problem. Thanks for maintaining it in the past. Is the same true for your other packages? $ grep Rothenberger cygwin-pkg-maint | grep -v ORPHANED cyrus-sasl David Rothenberger flac David Rothenberger libao David Rothenberger libapr1 David Rothenberger libaprutil1 David Rothenberger libkate David Rothenberger libogg David Rothenberger librsync David Rothenberger libtheora David Rothenberger libvorbis David Rothenberger rdiff-backup David Rothenberger speex David Rothenberger speexdsp David Rothenberger vorbis-tools David Rothenberger which David Rothenberger whois David Rothenberger Yes, I'm afraid it is. Regards, David -- David Rothenberger daver...@acm.org
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 24/03/2024 17:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote:
On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
I assume you are OK with the removal of python 3.5 (EOL Sept 2020)
and 3.6 (EOL Dec 2021)?
(I'm still dealing with cleaning up the final pieces of python27
detritus, but these should hopefully be much smaller tasks)
nothing should depend from 3.5
not sure for 3.6
I've automated some of the analysis I was doing for python2 packages and
the results are now available at [1].
So yeah, it looks like nothing uses 3.5.
I've removed some 3.4 detritus, and 3.5
Perhaps you can clarify the situation with python-pip: python-pip
19.0.3-1, 19.1.1-1 and 19.2.3-1 are not evaluated are being removable,
despite python35-pip being not needed anymore, as that source also
produces python-pip-wheel, which is depended upon by
python3{6,7,8,9}-virtualenv.
A similar situation exists with python-setuptools, python35-setuptools
and python-setuptools-wheel.
(virtualenv also depends on python-wheel-wheel, but that tracks the
latest version)
There are just a couple of packages using 3.6, I guess I'll ping the
maintainers about those.
[1] https://cygwin.com/packages/reports/python_rebuilds.html
It looks like the situation with 3.6 is a bit more complex, as some
things have a generic python3 dependency, rather than python36 as they
should, so that report isn't complete.
I have some tools to correct those dependencies, so the situation should
become clearer after I run those...
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 29/03/2024 18:32, David Rothenberger via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 3/28/2024 10:50 AM, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: [...] David, Is it possible to update/rebuild rdiff-backup, which replies upon the soon-to-be removed python36? (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this package, which will probably lead to it's removal). Please remove me as the maintainer from that package. I no longer use it, and no longer have an environment for building packages for Cygwin. No problem. Thanks for maintaining it in the past. Is the same true for your other packages? $ grep Rothenberger cygwin-pkg-maint | grep -v ORPHANED cyrus-sasl David Rothenberger flac David Rothenberger libaoDavid Rothenberger libapr1 David Rothenberger libaprutil1 David Rothenberger libkate David Rothenberger libogg David Rothenberger librsync David Rothenberger libtheoraDavid Rothenberger libvorbisDavid Rothenberger rdiff-backup David Rothenberger speexDavid Rothenberger speexdsp David Rothenberger vorbis-tools David Rothenberger whichDavid Rothenberger whoisDavid Rothenberger
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 3/28/2024 10:50 AM, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 17:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote: On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: I assume you are OK with the removal of python 3.5 (EOL Sept 2020) and 3.6 (EOL Dec 2021)? (I'm still dealing with cleaning up the final pieces of python27 detritus, but these should hopefully be much smaller tasks) nothing should depend from 3.5 not sure for 3.6 I've automated some of the analysis I was doing for python2 packages and the results are now available at [1]. So yeah, it looks like nothing uses 3.5. There are just a couple of packages using 3.6, I guess I'll ping the maintainers about those. [1] https://cygwin.com/packages/reports/python_rebuilds.html David, Is it possible to update/rebuild rdiff-backup, which replies upon the soon-to-be removed python36? (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this package, which will probably lead to it's removal). Please remove me as the maintainer from that package. I no longer use it, and no longer have an environment for building packages for Cygwin. Thanks, David -- David Rothenberger daver...@acm.org Katz' Law: Men and nations will act rationally when all other possibilities have been exhausted. History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. -- Abba Eban
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 2024-03-28 11:49, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 27/03/2024 21:18, Brian Inglis via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:07, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 18:51, Brian Inglis via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 2024-03-24 11:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote:
On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
[...]
Are they supposed to migrate to some alternate bindings maybe available from
a separate repo? Or are they just out of luck?
SOL! Dropped them in 1.52, probably why 1.31.0..1.51.0 are hanging around.
Nice :S
Feel free to purge as appropriate, or tell me what to add to cygport, hints,
etc!
So, the long list of source versions will hopefully be reduced in the
fullness of time...
Could I just add to nghttp2.cygport that nghttp2 obsoletes
python{2{,7},3{,6,7,8,9}}-nghttp2?
Does this have to remain in the cygport forever to avoid keeping nghttp2
vx.x.x around?
You could, but that's probably not the correct thing to do unless you really,
really want to forcibly uninstall those packages for anyone who has installed
them, which seems like unnecessary breakage.
I don't think you have to do anything. There's nothing "wrong" here.
If it really offends your sense of aesthetics, I suggest you just expire some
subset of the old versions using the vault command [1].
[1] https://cygwin.com/package-upload.html#deleting
Great idea!
Current setup packages are:
python3-nghttp2 1.43.0-1 x86_64
python36-nghttp2 1.46.0-1 x86_64
python37-nghttp2 1.46.0-1 x86_64
python38-nghttp2 1.51.0-1 x86_64
python39-nghttp2 1.51.0-1 x86_64
and 37 obsoletes 36 obsoletes 3, so from src:
Version Package Size DateFiles Status
1.31.0-1 (source) 1512 KiB 2018-03-16 01:07 [list of files] stable
1.37.0-1 (source) 1593 KiB 2019-03-27 03:17 [list of files] stable
1.43.0-1 (source) 3885 KiB 2021-05-30 06:33 [list of files] stable
1.44.0-1 (source) 3884 KiB 2021-07-19 11:32 [list of files] stable
1.45.1-1 (source) 3929 KiB 2021-09-26 12:08 [list of files] stable
1.46.0-1 (source) 3936 KiB 2021-10-24 03:17 [list of files] stable
1.49.0-1 (source) 4021 KiB 2022-08-28 01:08 [list of files] stable
1.50.0-1 (source) 4019 KiB 2022-09-25 19:43 [list of files] stable
1.51.0-1 (source) 4025 KiB 2022-11-13 20:42 [list of files] stable
1.58.0-1 (source) 1515 KiB 2023-10-29 17:13 [list of files] stable
1.59.0-1 (source) 1516 KiB 2024-01-21 19:31 [list of files] stable
1.60.0-1 (source) 1554 KiB 2024-03-03 17:16 [list of files] stable
I should be able to vault 1.31-1.45 and 1.49-1.50, or should I also add 1.46?
Could I also selectively upload -*.tar.xz for old python package versions?
--
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
La perfection est atteinte Perfection is achieved
non pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à ajouter not when there is no more to add
mais lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à retirer but when there is no more to cut
-- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 24/03/2024 17:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote: On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: I assume you are OK with the removal of python 3.5 (EOL Sept 2020) and 3.6 (EOL Dec 2021)? (I'm still dealing with cleaning up the final pieces of python27 detritus, but these should hopefully be much smaller tasks) nothing should depend from 3.5 not sure for 3.6 I've automated some of the analysis I was doing for python2 packages and the results are now available at [1]. So yeah, it looks like nothing uses 3.5. There are just a couple of packages using 3.6, I guess I'll ping the maintainers about those. [1] https://cygwin.com/packages/reports/python_rebuilds.html David, Is it possible to update/rebuild rdiff-backup, which replies upon the soon-to-be removed python36? (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this package, which will probably lead to it's removal). Thanks.
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 24/03/2024 17:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote: On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: I assume you are OK with the removal of python 3.5 (EOL Sept 2020) and 3.6 (EOL Dec 2021)? (I'm still dealing with cleaning up the final pieces of python27 detritus, but these should hopefully be much smaller tasks) nothing should depend from 3.5 not sure for 3.6 I've automated some of the analysis I was doing for python2 packages and the results are now available at [1]. So yeah, it looks like nothing uses 3.5. There are just a couple of packages using 3.6, I guess I'll ping the maintainers about those. [1] https://cygwin.com/packages/reports/python_rebuilds.html Ake, Is it possible to update/rebuild libftdi1, which only publishes python bindings for the soon-to-be removed python36? (Or indicate that you are no longer interested in maintaining this package, which will probably lead to it's removal). Thanks.
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 27/03/2024 21:18, Brian Inglis via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:07, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 18:51, Brian Inglis via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 2024-03-24 11:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote:
On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
[...]
Are they supposed to migrate to some alternate bindings maybe
available from a separate repo? Or are they just out of luck?
SOL! Dropped them in 1.52, probably why 1.31.0..1.51.0 are hanging around.
Nice :S
Feel free to purge as appropriate, or tell me what to add to cygport,
hints, etc!
So, the long list of source versions will hopefully be reduced in the
fullness of time...
Could I just add to nghttp2.cygport that nghttp2 obsoletes
python{2{,7},3{,6,7,8,9}}-nghttp2?
Does this have to remain in the cygport forever to avoid keeping nghttp2
vx.x.x around?
You could, but that's probably not the correct thing to do unless you
really, really want to forcibly uninstall those packages for anyone who
has installed them, which seems like unnecessary breakage.
I don't think you have to do anything. There's nothing "wrong" here.
If it really offends your sense of aesthetics, I suggest you just expire
some subset of the old versions using the vault command [1].
[1] https://cygwin.com/package-upload.html#deleting
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 2024-03-27 14:07, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 18:51, Brian Inglis via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 2024-03-24 11:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote:
On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
[...]
Not sure why my source package nghttp2 shows python install packages, when
they were dropped after 1.43 IIRC: build deps no longer include python/-devel?
If you haven't taken any specific action to retire the python-3x-nghttp2
packages, the existing ones will continue to be available indefinitely.
Firstly, it seems there's a question here about what are upstream's plans for
the users of the python bindings for this library.
Are they supposed to migrate to some alternate bindings maybe available from a
separate repo? Or are they just out of luck?
SOL! Dropped them in 1.52, probably why 1.31.0..1.51.0 are hanging around.
And why does that nghttp2 source package show a dozen archived source
versions, when its installed packages have only three?
The simple answer to that is we retain the source package for all available
install packages. This seems essential for an open-source project.
Now, as to why there are so many installable packages, this is the intersection
of a couple of unfortunate issues.
1. 'python3-nghttp2' is an "old-style" obsoletion package, where the package
exists, but is of category _obsolete, and requires the replacement package.
These are terrible, because we can't remove the obsolete package because that's
what records the fact of obsoletion.
I actually have some code for calm to internally convert that to a "new-style"
obsoletion, where the replacement package itself records the obsoletion (i.e.
python36-nghttp2 obsoletes: python3-nghttp2), which it continues to remember
about even after the package which contains that obsoleting is expired.
Once that's done, all those "old-style" obsoletion packages lingering in our
package repository can be removed (along with their corresponding source).
But I still need to do some testing before that can be deployed.
(However, all that's probably not what's actually wanted with python packages:
it's preferable to have python3-foo be a virtual package which pulls in
python3x-foo, where python3x is the current python, so that scripted installs
can be written which ask for python3 and python3-foo and continue to work while
x changes...)
2. We haven't purged old python versions for a long time, so e.g the python36
binding packages are still lingering.
As you can see, I'm just now getting around to looking at expiring python36,
which eventually should lead to python36-nghttp2 being expired (insert some
observations about how it doesn't have to be me doing these things here)...
Feel free to purge as appropriate, or tell me what to add to cygport, hints,
etc!
So, the long list of source versions will hopefully be reduced in the fullness
of time...
Could I just add to nghttp2.cygport that nghttp2 obsoletes
python{2{,7},3{,6,7,8,9}}-nghttp2?
Does this have to remain in the cygport forever to avoid keeping nghttp2 vx.x.x
around?
--
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
La perfection est atteinte Perfection is achieved
non pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à ajouter not when there is no more to add
mais lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à retirer but when there is no more to cut
-- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 24/03/2024 18:51, Brian Inglis via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 2024-03-24 11:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote: On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: [...] Not sure why my source package nghttp2 shows python install packages, when they were dropped after 1.43 IIRC: build deps no longer include python/-devel? If you haven't taken any specific action to retire the python-3x-nghttp2 packages, the existing ones will continue to be available indefinitely. Firstly, it seems there's a question here about what are upstream's plans for the users of the python bindings for this library. Are they supposed to migrate to some alternate bindings maybe available from a separate repo? Or are they just out of luck? And why does that nghttp2 source package show a dozen archived source versions, when its installed packages have only three? The simple answer to that is we retain the source package for all available install packages. This seems essential for an open-source project. Now, as to why there are so many installable packages, this is the intersection of a couple of unfortunate issues. 1. 'python3-nghttp2' is an "old-style" obsoletion package, where the package exists, but is of category _obsolete, and requires the replacement package. These are terrible, because we can't remove the obsolete package because that's what records the fact of obsoletion. I actually have some code for calm to internally convert that to a "new-style" obsoletion, where the replacement package itself records the obsoletion (i.e. python36-nghttp2 obsoletes: python3-nghttp2), which it continues to remember about even after the package which contains that obsoleting is expired. Once that's done, all those "old-style" obsoletion packages lingering in our package repository can be removed (along with their corresponding source). But I still need to do some testing before that can be deployed. (However, all that's probably not what's actually wanted with python packages: it's preferable to have python3-foo be a virtual package which pulls in python3x-foo, where python3x is the current python, so that scripted installs can be written which ask for python3 and python3-foo and continue to work while x changes...) 2. We haven't purged old python versions for a long time, so e.g the python36 binding packages are still lingering. As you can see, I'm just now getting around to looking at expiring python36, which eventually should lead to python36-nghttp2 being expired (insert some observations about how it doesn't have to be me doing these things here)... Feel free to purge as appropriate, or tell me what to add to cygport, hints, etc! So, the long list of source versions will hopefully be reduced in the fullness of time...
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 2024-03-24 11:46, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote: On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: I assume you are OK with the removal of python 3.5 (EOL Sept 2020) and 3.6 (EOL Dec 2021)? (I'm still dealing with cleaning up the final pieces of python27 detritus, but these should hopefully be much smaller tasks) nothing should depend from 3.5 not sure for 3.6 I've automated some of the analysis I was doing for python2 packages and the results are now available at [1]. So yeah, it looks like nothing uses 3.5. There are just a couple of packages using 3.6, I guess I'll ping the maintainers about those. [1] https://cygwin.com/packages/reports/python_rebuilds.html Not sure why my source package nghttp2 shows python install packages, when they were dropped after 1.43 IIRC: build deps no longer include python/-devel? And why does that nghttp2 source package show a dozen archived source versions, when its installed packages have only three? Feel free to purge as appropriate, or tell me what to add to cygport, hints, etc! -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada La perfection est atteinte Perfection is achieved non pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à ajouter not when there is no more to add mais lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien à retirer but when there is no more to cut -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 24/03/2024 17:31, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote: On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote: On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: I assume you are OK with the removal of python 3.5 (EOL Sept 2020) and 3.6 (EOL Dec 2021)? (I'm still dealing with cleaning up the final pieces of python27 detritus, but these should hopefully be much smaller tasks) nothing should depend from 3.5 not sure for 3.6 I've automated some of the analysis I was doing for python2 packages and the results are now available at [1]. So yeah, it looks like nothing uses 3.5. There are just a couple of packages using 3.6, I guess I'll ping the maintainers about those. [1] https://cygwin.com/packages/reports/python_rebuilds.html
Re: Python 3.5 and 3.6 removal (was Re: Bonfire of the Packages)
On 24/03/2024 15:07, Jon Turney wrote: On 24/09/2023 13:32, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote: I assume you are OK with the removal of python 3.5 (EOL Sept 2020) and 3.6 (EOL Dec 2021)? (I'm still dealing with cleaning up the final pieces of python27 detritus, but these should hopefully be much smaller tasks) nothing should depend from 3.5 not sure for 3.6
