Hi Ole, It would be great have two different package. One of them, the python3 version and maintain the python2 version.
Regards! Emmanuel El mié., 10 de ene. de 2018 a la(s) 18:03, Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org> escribió: > On 10.01.2018 17:06, Ole Streicher wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am the maintainer of the "python-astropy" package, that currently > > creates packages for both Python 2 and Python 3. Both packages have a > > number of reverse dependencies. > > > > Recently, upstream announced a new version 3.0 of astropy, which > > supports Python 3 only, and I think of the best mid-term strategy: The > > old version 2.0 is supported upstream for ~2 years, and I want to have a > > smooth migration path. I checked the wiki, but could not find good > > information about migration. > > Currently discussed. See "Python2 EOL and moving towards Python3" on this > ML. > > > I thought of a temporary package split: create a new source package > > "astropy" that inherits of the current python-astropy package, but only > > builds python3-astropy (and the utils + doc, which depend on > > python3-astropy), and update this to version 3.0. Then I would remove > > these binary packages from the python-astropy package. In parallel, I > > would file bugs (severity: important) to remove the reverse dependencies > > of the Python 2 packages (many of them are mine, but also may have > > reverse dependencies). > > > > As long as there are substantial problems with the removal of the Python > > 2 support, I then keep the "old" python-astropy package updated. Once > > everything is figured out and we decide to finally kick out Python 2 > > support (from Debian-Astro, or from Debian), I would set the remaining > > bugs as RC, and (once they are solved) remove the "python-astropy" > > package. > > > > Does this sound reasonable? And how should I do this technically? > > well, astropy is not such a mainstream package that I would mind removing > some > of it's reverse dependencies. If you want to add the additional pain > having a > separate Python2 source stack, go for it. I wouldn't want to do that > myself. If > not, just go ahead with Python3 after having identified the reverse > dependencies > which are not maintained by yourself. > > Matthias > > -- Arias Emmanuel https://www.linkedin.com/in/emmanuel-arias-437a6a8a http://eamanu.com
