On Sat, 2020-03-07 at 18:49 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 07 Mar 2020, Michał Górny wrote: > > Ebuilds. 183 of them. One is stuck on py2 but is included as only > > revdep. > > Just the ebuild being outdated doesn't sound like a sufficient reason > for removal of a package, at least not for those packages that install > applications for the end user.
The list is almost exclusively about dev-python/, i.e. packages that do not install end-user applications but Python modules. > > But that's by no means all ebuilds like that, just a subset Python > > team doesn't see much of a point maintaining. > > Why had they been added then, in the first place? > You should ask the person who added them. Some of them probably used to have revdeps in the past but lost them (either because they switched to other deps or were removed). Some of them were added because somebody used it at some point. Some of them were added because someone thought it would be great idea to package a lot of Python modules because we can. Some of these someones have retired since. Some left the Python team. Some weren't ever part of it yet dumped packages on us. I could go on like this for much longer but what's the purpose? The point is, python@ has a lot of packages, we can't maintain them all. These packages weren't really maintained for at least a few months, so dropping them lets us focus on packages that do have dependencies or otherwise seem more useful. I mean, surely, we can try to test ~300 packages on py3.7 just to discover half of them were added without tests, large number have failing tests, some have silly mistakes... -- Best regards, Michał Górny
Description: This is a digitally signed message part