On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 11:13:20AM -0800, Martin Kelly wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 10:55:23 -0800 Martin Kelly <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > On 2/2/20 8:39 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > > should we remove this package then? or do you want to generate a
> > > python3-gmpy?
> > >
> >
> > I didn't realize, but it looks like this package actually does support
> > Python 3. I had assumed we would let this package die when Python 2
> > dies, since the package is dead upstream since 2013. However, looking at
> > the popcon stats, the original python GMPY is still much more popular
> > than than python GMPY2 (3543 vs 443). So I think it's worth keeping this
> > package.
> >
> > I'm working on converting it over now and should be able to get it done
> > in the next few weeks.
> >
> > Is it possible to remove the AUTORM tag until this is done, or should we
> > let it get deleted and upload a new python3-gmpy package after that?
> >
>
> Looking further, it seems that with current versions of Python 3 (I tested
> with 3.7.3), the old GMPY 1.17 is no longer passing. When I run
> test3/gmpy_test.py, I'm getting:
>
> $ python3 test3/gmpy_test.py
> ...
> 8 items had failures:
> 1 of 4 in gmpy_test_cvr
> 4 of 126 in gmpy_test_cvr.__test__.user_errors
> 1 of 1 in gmpy_test_dec
> 2 of 2 in gmpy_test_mpf
> 2 of 60 in gmpy_test_mpf.__test__.binio
> 2 of 2 in gmpy_test_mpq
> 2 of 4 in gmpy_test_mpz
> 7 of 25 in gmpy_test_rnd.__test__.rand
> 1504 tests in 42 items.
> 1483 passed and 21 failed.
> ***Test Failed*** 21 failures.
>
> In contrast, the tests for GMPY 2 all succeed, so I think the author clearly
> intended for tests to fully pass. Since this hasn't been maintained for 7 or
> so years, I'm not too surprised.
>
> Given this, I think we should let this package be removed and consider
> resurrecting it in the future if people ask for it and someone will step up
> to maintain it.
>
> Sandro, is there anything more to do if I want to let this package be
> removed, or do I just wait for the auto-removal?
Martin, what are you referring here to with "removed"? Removal from testing
or unstable? The former happened automatically in the mean time, the
latter needs a bug using "reportbug ftp.debian.org"
Cheers,
Moritz
