Bug#936508: fdb: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
What was the point of introducing the python-fdb (py2) package again? It will never enter testing.
Bug#936508: fdb: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
On Saturday, December 7, 2019 8:03:42 PM EST Russell Stuart wrote: > On Sat, 2019-12-07 at 23:46 +, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > I won't, but I think you have it backwards. Until changes like this > > are made, python2 can't be removed. Your approach leaves us with a > > Catch 22. > > Thanks. > > Part of the reason for my reluctance is I don't understand the haste in > removing Python2. It will wither and die anyway in it's own time, but > why is it necessary to speed that process up? > > As the fdb maintainer I agree it would be nice to have just one version > to support, but I am also a fdb user. For a user it creates a lot of > urgent work. I (I suspect like a lot of sysadmin's who use python as > an alternative to bash) have accumulated a lot of python2 scripts over > the decades. When I touch one I convert it to python3, but it's a slow > process. I can't see any good reason to speed it up, and it doesn't > help python3 is worse than python2 as a bash replacement. > > Now you are forcing me to speed that process up. If I thought I was an > outlier then c'est la vie I guess, but my gut feeling is I am not, and > there have been comments made in passing on debian-devel that back that > up. > > There hasn't been much discussion so far, but when it happens I suspect > there is going to be a lot of push back. Thus my wait and see > attitude. In the mean time if maintaining Python2 is too much of a > burden you could always orphan it. Neither the Debian Python interpreter maintainer nor the members of the major Python related teams (DPMT and PAPT) think shipping a python interpreter without security support is a good idea. That's, AIUI, the primary driver. So far, I think we're about 60% through the upgrading/removal of python2 related packages. So far, there hasn't been significant push back that I've seen. So far, we've been trying to gracefully unwind the python2 stack without breaking a lot of things. I think it's more likely that things would get less graceful than that the goal would be abandoned. At some point python-future is going to be removed from Testing and you'll have to decide if you want to ship fdb in the next release or not. I'll go back to just waiting and seeing how this plays out. Scott K signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#936508: fdb: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
On Sat, 2019-12-07 at 23:46 +, Scott Kitterman wrote: > I won't, but I think you have it backwards. Until changes like this > are made, python2 can't be removed. Your approach leaves us with a > Catch 22. Thanks. Part of the reason for my reluctance is I don't understand the haste in removing Python2. It will wither and die anyway in it's own time, but why is it necessary to speed that process up? As the fdb maintainer I agree it would be nice to have just one version to support, but I am also a fdb user. For a user it creates a lot of urgent work. I (I suspect like a lot of sysadmin's who use python as an alternative to bash) have accumulated a lot of python2 scripts over the decades. When I touch one I convert it to python3, but it's a slow process. I can't see any good reason to speed it up, and it doesn't help python3 is worse than python2 as a bash replacement. Now you are forcing me to speed that process up. If I thought I was an outlier then c'est la vie I guess, but my gut feeling is I am not, and there have been comments made in passing on debian-devel that back that up. There hasn't been much discussion so far, but when it happens I suspect there is going to be a lot of push back. Thus my wait and see attitude. In the mean time if maintaining Python2 is too much of a burden you could always orphan it. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#936508: fdb: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
On December 7, 2019 11:23:50 PM UTC, Russell Stuart wrote: >On Sat, 2019-12-07 at 15:27 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: >> Technically this is blocked by #938555, but it's only a Suggests >> relationship, so I would think it's OK to go ahead to drop the >> python-fdb binary. If you are busy and would prefer someone else >> handle it, please let me know and I'll be glad to do an NMU. > >My view is the appropriate time to look at it is when python2 is >dropped. Until then it's speculation as to whether it will be dropped, >and I'm not interested in doing things that may have to be undone >latter. > >Please do not NMU. I won't, but I think you have it backwards. Until changes like this are made, python2 can't be removed. Your approach leaves us with a Catch 22. Scott K
Bug#936508: fdb: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
On Sat, 2019-12-07 at 15:27 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > Technically this is blocked by #938555, but it's only a Suggests > relationship, so I would think it's OK to go ahead to drop the > python-fdb binary. If you are busy and would prefer someone else > handle it, please let me know and I'll be glad to do an NMU. My view is the appropriate time to look at it is when python2 is dropped. Until then it's speculation as to whether it will be dropped, and I'm not interested in doing things that may have to be undone latter. Please do not NMU. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#936508: fdb: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 07:16:59 + Matthias Klose wrote: > Package: src:fdb > Version: 2.0.0-1 > Severity: normal > Tags: sid bullseye > User: debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org > Usertags: py2removal > > Python2 becomes end-of-live upstream, and Debian aims to remove > Python2 from the distribution, as discussed in > https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2019/07/msg00080.html > > Your package either build-depends, depends on Python2, or uses Python2 > in the autopkg tests. Please stop using Python2, and fix this issue > by one of the following actions. ... Technically this is blocked by #938555, but it's only a Suggests relationship, so I would think it's OK to go ahead to drop the python-fdb binary. If you are busy and would prefer someone else handle it, please let me know and I'll be glad to do an NMU. Scott K signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
