* Christian Hofstaedtler: " Bug#810007: Please consider suds-jurko in light of Fedora doing the same" (Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:52:45 +0100):
Hi Christian, > Package: python-suds > Priority: wishlist > > Dear Maintainer, > > Fedora may consider replacing their suds package with the suds-jurko > fork [1]. > > Please consider if this would be a good thing for Debian, too > (reducing cross-distro issues). There is a long-standing issue about this subject at [1]. You probably didn't find the issue, because it was automatically archived. I just unarchived the bug and merged both. > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Suds_Jurko_Fork Thanks for the link. I don't agree with the owner (Scott Talbert) about Upgrade/compatibility impact No impact expected. and User Experience No changes expected to user experience. because he was informed [2], that I was already bitten by API incompatibility of suds-jurko vs. suds. Furthermore the situation with suds-jurko has not changed in any respect: Last release 2014-01-24 (2 years ago!) Last commit on bitbucket: 2015-07-27 with an increasing number of unhandled issues and pull requests. So for me the situation with suds-jurko is only a slight improvement over original suds, both being problematic n the same way. A future maintainer of suds-jurko in Debian has to be aware to be in charge to handle a quite substantial number of patches and/or security issues on his own. As already stated I am not in favor of introducing software with such implications into the archive, at least I will not be the one to maintain it. Scott applied to take over maintainership for python-suds those last days (by PM), to which I will reply with a separate mail. > Thank you, > Christian Best, Mathias [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=783029 [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=788087 -- Mathias Behrle PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0x8405BBF6
pgpkwS7nZ9Cqf.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
