Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps
Hi, po 11. 11. 2019 v 12:07 odesílatel Yves-Alexis Perez napsal: > generic question about the interaction between the python transition and > current situation with NEW processing. > I think it's unrelated. State of NEW processing is stable for long time. But if you need to accept NEW binary-only I think it's fine to ping ftp-masters over IRC. I already did this few times and they don't bite :) -- Best regards Ondřej Nový
Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2019-11-11 at 12:04 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > > sorry if this has been discussed already somewhere else (I stopped reading > > - -devel@ a long time ago) but is there something done to improve NEW > > processing > > here? I have two package sitting there because of the introduction of a > > - -python3 binary package. I don't think it's really make sense to remove > > python2 stuff if python3 stuff can't enter the archive… > > well, at least you can name the packages in your email ... Hi Matthias, the packages are libimobiledevices and libplist but this mail wasn't specific about my packages (or I would have contacted ftpmasters list) but rather a generic question about the interaction between the python transition and current situation with NEW processing. Regards, - -- Yves-Alexis -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEE8vi34Qgfo83x35gF3rYcyPpXRFsFAl3JQL4ACgkQ3rYcyPpX RFuEzQf/X2eaVjrjP1dMKHEhTz9Ez6fCjSEKDlHC5XfsFb4AmtPhkvUUBdeczmO0 aC6+m9Izpsr0c6Vr52GXbSrZsaAtEB93+4FkDMwt2FvXQEi+Azvl9Hub5jAJx7WT ocinEEQVgP2d4vxAs8ROY86Qm77nVKJ4jMw35Sjxvw1HNrA9fgIepk+0b9XA0Kxf f5GOvb1fxnEjy6L5zqYQMRkdTrGvoRFLMjWxAwLj/VpWadr3jXBrObtIbCV4Lywk DIlJ56mnMz9u12i35U0ccwXYvlHSCI9g9V99JWWLJdAEXG8Pi1tcv935XkFuyXAz jXCaUlLik64/FK7YkIrBS2WtmudViQ== =V+3N -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps
On 11.11.19 11:43, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2019-11-11 at 10:33 +0100, Ondřej Nový wrote: We are going to raise the severity of the py2removal bugs to "serious" in several steps. In the first phase we are going to raise severity of the py2removal bugs for all leaf module packages and low popcon (< 300) application packages. Bugs marked with the "py2keep" user tag will not have their severity raised. If nobody fixes that bug, the packages will be auto-removed from testing. We will also then file bug reports against ftp.debian.org to remove such packages from unstable. We are going to do this semi- automatically as additional packages become leaf packages. Hi, sorry if this has been discussed already somewhere else (I stopped reading - -devel@ a long time ago) but is there something done to improve NEW processing here? I have two package sitting there because of the introduction of a - -python3 binary package. I don't think it's really make sense to remove python2 stuff if python3 stuff can't enter the archive… well, at least you can name the packages in your email ...
Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2019-11-11 at 10:33 +0100, Ondřej Nový wrote: > We are going to raise the severity of the py2removal bugs to "serious" > in several steps. In the > first phase we are going to raise severity of the py2removal bugs for > all leaf module packages and low popcon (< 300) application packages. > Bugs marked with the "py2keep" user tag will not have their severity > raised. If nobody fixes that bug, the packages will be auto-removed > from testing. > We will also then file bug reports against ftp.debian.org to remove > such packages from unstable. We are going to do this semi- > automatically as additional packages become leaf packages. Hi, sorry if this has been discussed already somewhere else (I stopped reading - -devel@ a long time ago) but is there something done to improve NEW processing here? I have two package sitting there because of the introduction of a - -python3 binary package. I don't think it's really make sense to remove python2 stuff if python3 stuff can't enter the archive… Regards, - -- Yves-Alexis -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEE8vi34Qgfo83x35gF3rYcyPpXRFsFAl3JO2EACgkQ3rYcyPpX RFvT6QgAoc0t3/jqSqvd21TExKaD5cfAapJva9/pjABOX//ZUOF4WFgbmfeOso3h Qz3spQJgrxMYc1R6EZYVi6qlMesH4uDmKaGhfskaVvIL640k7OxMy9taXXBOW2N9 4Sn6ILPqwLp6OmDJxg9I5jIkxJE+VlLJzvJderbEueu67sulD3pCyA6E1HQGqB2R S7f0YHVEnAhBDmChZBCXtrChZwt/DHwAQlI/Ud4OlNVyHTKdl37myqk+Es5S/8vL VO0zyIgiyLhLyQJsw9gTrGkl4aXFQhIfcyzGUgOvQredQb9airhJCTU+djVShk7Y neEVMDF30IBRwyepKMJG8OYOJ8O1tQ== =6uw7 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps
Hi, We are aiming to remove Python 2 for the bullseye release, or at least remove as many Python 2 related packages as possible. Python 2 is discontinued upstream, but crucially, more and more providers of Python modules don't support Python 2 in either the current or future upstream version. Some FAQs and guidelines can be found at https://wiki.debian.org/Python/2Removal. With about 3300 py2removal bugs filed and 1500 closed, we are now almost done with half of the removals. We are going to raise the severity of the py2removal bugs to "serious" in several steps. In the first phase we are going to raise severity of the py2removal bugs for all leaf module packages and low popcon (< 300) application packages. Bugs marked with the "py2keep" user tag will not have their severity raised. If nobody fixes that bug, the packages will be auto-removed from testing. We will also then file bug reports against ftp.debian.org to remove such packages from unstable. We are going to do this semi- automatically as additional packages become leaf packages. We are working with the Lintian maintainers to bump the severity of Python 2 related tags in Lintian. If you are absolutely sure you need to keep your Python 2 only application in Debian, you should mark the Python 2 removal bug with the "py2keep" user tag (please do not replace the py2remove tag), using the debian-python@lists.debian.org user. Please CC the bug report, because it's non-obvious who is changing a user tag by just reading the bug report, and provide a rationale for claiming it is "py2keep". py2keep must not be placed on reverse dependencies of pygtk, because the Debian Gnome maintainers already announced the removal of pygtk in bullseye. All dependency fields in debian/control and debian/tests/control must also be updated to stop using the unversioned python packages (python, python-dbg, python-dev, python-doc) and instead use the versioned package names (python2, python2-dbg, python2-dev, python2-doc); this applies to both build-time and runtime dependencies. Unversioned interpreters must also not be used in the shebang lines (use #!/usr/bin/python2 instead). When using dh-python, this will be done automatically. Check for explicit python and python-dev build dependencies. Don't forget to look at autopkgtest tests as well (for both package and interpreter names). For questions, feel free to contact people on the debian-python@lists.debian.org ML or on IRC (#debian-python on OFTC). -- Best regards Ondřej Nový Matthias Klose signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
