On Thu, 19 Aug, 2021, 8:12 pm Steffen Möller, <steffen_moel...@gmx.de> wrote:
> > On 19.08.21 15:37, Nilesh Patra wrote: > > > > On 8/19/21 5:52 PM, Steffen Möller wrote: > >> Dear all, > >> > >> This is another small dependency nagging me: > >> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/pytest-ordering > >> > >> pytest-3 does not find the local module when runnig cowbuilder, but it > >> is just fine with gbp or dpkg-buildpackage. Does this ring any bell for > you? > > FWIW, > > > > [1]: https://github.com/ftobia/pytest-ordering/issues/66 > > [2]: https://github.com/ftobia/pytest-ordering/issues/32 > > [3]: https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest-order > > Thank you for finding this. I checked out > https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest-order and .. after some toying > around ... came to the conclusion that this needs to be a separate > package since it is not compatible. > > On a sidenote - I think about three Python packages were accepted into > main this day, all created or sponsored by you. Many thanks! This is > also what triggered me in my attempt to address pytest-ordering :) > > So, for the moment I think we should go for two packages - > pytest-ordering and pytest-order. But correct me if I am wrong. > tl;dr: Ask upstream and do not package both Both serve the same purpose, it doesn't make sense to package both. You should rather ask upstream to start using a dependency that is maintained instead. Pushing things to the archive that are unmaintained increases workload. pytest-ordering is broken ATM, tests fail and those failures are legit. There are some PRs that should be merged, but that contains a lot of extra work for us as downstream if we patch a lot of code. We have limited time/energy ofcourse, right? Nilesh >
