On Màrt 23, 2018 aig 03:43:13f +0000, Toshio Kuratomi sgrìobh: > Depends on what the groups of packagers want... A macro for Django would > definitely have given an easy option for packagers to take advantage of. > Otoh, how far in advance was the Django removal telegraphed and how much > chance was there that a new maintainer would pick it up? It doesn't do as > much good for a package that is going to definitely drop support in the > very next release as it does for a package that is going to drop support > two releases from now, maybe, unless someone decides to pick it up, even at > the last minute, perhaps only after they realize it's been removed from the > repository.... > > Why do we want to avoid *breaking* everything at once? I can see us > wanting to keep things *working* as long as it makes sense to the set of > packagers that care (which I think adding the macro would aid in) but it > doesn't feel like actively designing things to break a little at a time is > helpful to anyone. Users can't count on things working from release to > release and packagers have to do more work to keep the pieces they care > about working.
I, for one, am glad to drop python2 support in everything I maintain. In fact, I have already started doing so with packages I maintain that do not have any dependencies that I can see on the python2 side. -- Dulaney.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
