On Sat, 2020-03-07 at 22:22 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat, 07 Mar 2020, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Surely, you can claim we could just drop them to maintainer-needed.
> > What problem does that solve?  The package would still miss 3.7 support.
> > Users will still suffer when we switch the default (if they have any
> > users, that is).  We would still have to last rite them when 3.6 is
> > gone.  What's the gain?
> > Right, let's talk about m-needed.  Over 2000 packages already and still
> > growing.  What message does *that* send to the users?
> Sorry, but where have I suggested to drop these packages to m-n?
> > How about the following message: the difference between Gentoo
> > and Debian stable is that Gentoo doesn't have the 'b'.
> > Finally, what message does it send to our users when developers keep
> > picking up fights like this?  You seem to disagree with my work
> > on Gentoo, and the only solution you can come up is publicly shaming me?
> > This isn't 'let's discuss a better solution' kind of mail, this is
> > 'justify yourself before me, you puny developer, how dare you do things
> > I don't like'.
> This is neither a fight nor a personal issue. Also, please don't put
> words in my mouth that I haven't said and never intended to say.
> Ulrich

In general, I don't the see the point of this thread. Python requires explicit
implementation enabling, and unless you're willing to help test py3.7 on py3.6-
only packages, complaining about masking packages gets us absolutely nowhere.
Propose actual solutions and step in to help and bump packages. Walk the walk,
don't just talk the talk.

Reply via email to