On 2022-12-12 18 h 51, Graham Inggs wrote:
Dear Python Team

Looking at the current state of the 'adding Python 3.11 as a supported
version' transition [1], the tracker [2] shows only 12 red packages
(excluding unknowns and packages not in testing) remaining, copied
below for reference.

We believe all FTBFS and autopkgtest regression bugs have already been
filed and tagged.

The current state of bugs tagged 'python3.11' [3] is 116 resolved and
49 still open.  Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to fixing
these, and especially to the organizers of the recent Python sprint
[4].

As this transition is non-blocking (i.e. uploaded packages are able to
migrate ahead of python3-defaults), we could wait for the remaining
bugs to be fixed, or for auto-removal to take its course.  However,
with the bookworm transition freeze only one month away [5], we'd like
to hear from the Python Team within the next week whether they wish to
proceed with Python 3.11 being the only supported version for bookworm
(in which case we will allow python3-defaults to migrate right now)
or, revert the changes in python3-defaults and have Python 3.10 as the
only supported version for bookworm.

Should it be the former, we'd like an undertaking from the Python Team
that they will help resolve the remaining bugs against key packages
[6], as these cannot easily be avoided by manual or auto-removals.

On behalf of the Release Team
Graham

I still feel the move to 3.11 so late in the release cycle was cavalier and we should have used our energies to fix issues we had in the archive instead of trying to fix 3.11 bugs.

I've said it already here, but it's very frustrating to work on packaging python libraries and apps for a whole release cycle, just to see all that work put in the bin at the last minute because upstream doesn't support 3.11.

I hate to be put in a position where I have to tell upstreams (some with whom I've been collaborating for years) "ahem, by the way, you have 2 months to fix this or it won't be in the next Debian stable release".

That said, 3.11 proponents certainly walked the walk and fixed a lot of stuff already. Kudos to them.

I don't feel like I can take position on this. I'm certainly biased by one of the packages I really care about not being 3.11 compatible (and probably won't be before the release).

All I know is this late transition leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

--
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Louis-Philippe Véronneau
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋   po...@debian.org / veronneau.org
  ⠈⠳⣄

Attachment: OpenPGP_0xE1E5457C8BAD4113.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to