A new version of https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python-model-bakery is
available but it cannot be uploaded as the tests fail with the
pytest-django 3.* series.
https://github.com/model-bakers/model_bakery/issues/311
The new upstream will need pytest-django >= 4.5.2
With pytest itself updated
Hi,
On 2022-06-08 14:47, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> 1. finalcif: it seems like an update to python3-gemmi has broken this
> package
Yes, this is indeed the case with finalcif. Will report and investigate
it soon.
Best,
Andrius
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 03:49:37PM -0400, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > Sandro: you managed the numpy transition, it seems. What is involved
> > in something like this? I would imagine something like:
> >
> > (1) Upload pytest 7.x to experimental
>
> i took care of this just now, uploading
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 03:49:37PM -0400, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > Sandro: you managed the numpy transition, it seems. What is involved
> > in something like this? I would imagine something like:
> >
> > (1) Upload pytest 7.x to experimental
>
> i took care of this just now, uploading
> Sandro: you managed the numpy transition, it seems. What is involved
> in something like this? I would imagine something like:
>
> (1) Upload pytest 7.x to experimental
i took care of this just now, uploading pytest/7.1.2 to experimental
(and i've messed up the branches on salsa, so i've
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 08:27:38AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > Anyone willing to go for it?
> >
> > I thought you were volunteering for it? :) jokes aside, i think
> > preparing the new pytest upstream release for experimental may be the
> > "easiest" part of this ordeal.
>
> I guess it
On 2022-06-07 04:01, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> I would consider pytest a "core" python package, and so a complete
> rdeps rebuild is appropriate
+1. That is what I meant by suggesting ratt-rebuilding all the rdeps.
Best,
Andrius
On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 09:01:37PM -0400, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > > I think this page includes debci results for experimental:
> > >
> > > https://release.debian.org/britney/pseudo-excuses-experimental.html
> > >
> > > It shows what would happen when migrating experimental to unstable.
> >
> > Oh
> > I think this page includes debci results for experimental:
> >
> > https://release.debian.org/britney/pseudo-excuses-experimental.html
> >
> > It shows what would happen when migrating experimental to unstable.
>
> Oh wow, thanks! That's perfect. So we can upload the new pytest to
>
On Sat, Jun 04, 2022 at 10:29:53AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-06-03 at 19:08 +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>
> > I believe that ci.debian.net checks packages against packages in
> > experimental (see
> > https://ci.debian.net/packages/s/spyder/unstable/amd64/ for example),
> > so it may
On Fri, 2022-06-03 at 19:08 +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I believe that ci.debian.net checks packages against packages in
> experimental (see
> https://ci.debian.net/packages/s/spyder/unstable/amd64/ for example),
> so it may be that the work is already done for us; what I don't know,
> though,
On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 05:28:36PM +0200, julien.pu...@gmail.com wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 juin 2022 à 10:28 -0400, Sandro Tosi a écrit :
> > > I would suggest ratt-rebuilding all reverse dependencies. Could
> > > that be
> > > done?
> >
> > there order of thousands rdeps, i dont think it's fair to
Le jeudi 02 juin 2022 à 10:28 -0400, Sandro Tosi a écrit :
> > I would suggest ratt-rebuilding all reverse dependencies. Could
> > that be
> > done?
>
> there order of thousands rdeps, i dont think it's fair to ask any
> individual contributor the time and resources to check that via ratt.
> I would suggest ratt-rebuilding all reverse dependencies. Could that be
> done?
there order of thousands rdeps, i dont think it's fair to ask any
individual contributor the time and resources to check that via ratt.
Something i've done in the past (f.e. with numpy and matplotlib) is
leveraging
Hi Julian,
On 2022-06-02 11:23, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> When I updated pytest-mock, I noticed that pytest is somewhat out of
> date and it would be good to upgrade it. But it's quite a major
> package, and I don't really want to do it without a go-ahead from
> others.
>
> Perhaps we could upload
Hi all,
When I updated pytest-mock, I noticed that pytest is somewhat out of
date and it would be good to upgrade it. But it's quite a major
package, and I don't really want to do it without a go-ahead from
others.
Perhaps we could upload a newer version to experimental first to see
what
16 matches
Mail list logo
