Hi Nilesh, Nilesh Patra, on 2022-11-23: > On Wed, 23 Nov 2022 15:07:32 +0200 Andrius Merkys <mer...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 23:54:48 +0100 =?utf-8?Q?=C3=89tienne?= Mollier > > <emoll...@debian.org> wrote: > > > Hi, mostly retitling the open entry against biopython for the > > > sake of clarity, and also pinging both bugs to reset auto- > > > removal counters. We don't have much news from t_coffee > > > upstream to day unfortunately. Maybe it will be necessary to > > > revert the t-coffee version bump for the upcoming Debian release > > > or do people see other options? > > > > This issue is blocking Python 3.11-add transition, but we surely do not > > want biopython to be dropped from testing. However, the problem is not > > with biopython, but with t-coffee which biopython merely uses for tests. > > Would it be acceptable to skip t-coffee tests for now thus unblocking > > Python 3.11-add transition? > > This bug report should remain open to remind > > us bring t-coffee tests back once #1022570 is solved. > > That sounds quite a reasonable thing to do, but we probably should also > decrese the severity of this bug to "important" to let biopython be in testing > once the corresponding tests are skipped. > > Étienne, what do you think?
I removed the build-dependency on t-coffee for the experimental upload of biopython 1.80 in order to get tests to go through. This skips the faulty test in biopython. t-coffee merely enhances biopython, and I don't believe it would impede the overall usability of the module. It will be possible to reduce the severity of the bug once one migrates python-biopython to sid. If in the meantime t-coffee gets fixed or reverted, then we could even restore the tests and close the bug. Have a nice day, :) -- Étienne Mollier <emoll...@emlwks999.eu> Fingerprint: 8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c 8236 793c f67e 8f0d 11da Sent from /dev/pts/2, please excuse my verbosity. On air: Supertramp - Even in the Quietest Moments
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature