On Sun, Sep 09, 2018 at 11:14:57PM -0400, Scott Talbert wrote: > On Sun, 9 Sep 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > >>>I'm thinking about removing some of my Python 2 subpackages (that > >>>are no longer used). However, I'm wondering about the case where > >>>the removed packages should be added to fedora-obsolete-packages. I > >>>don't _think_ the removal of my packages would cause any problems > >>>upon upgrade. > >>> > >>>Can someone provide an example of a situation where a removed > >>>package could cause a problem on upgrade (and should thus be added > >>>to fedora-obsolete-packages). > >> > >>Hi, > >> > >>you should always add the old subpackage to fedora-obsolete-packages. > > > >This is not the FPC's conclusion. You should only do it if it is > >problematic (as in your example 1 bellow).
Heh, I don't think the FPC policy is very robust. We know from experience that when users see "80 packages cannot be upgraded and were skipped", they don't like it. I'm myself an experienced packager and I still hate it, because it takes quite a bit of time to figure out what exactly is the issue. Sometimes it's indeed an obsolete package, but sometimes maintainers screw up and there's a conflict between packages, sometimes it's a mirror issue [1]. With the policy of "obsolete from fedora-obsolete-packages sometimes" we'll always be playing whack-a-mole because with approx. 2800 subpackages becoming obsolete, it is absolutely guaranteed that some maintainers get it wrong. There's even 700+ non-noarch packages which are much more likely to cause problems. IMHO a simple policy of "always obsolete" is the only thing that can work at this scale. [1] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7792 > >https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/754#comment-512716 > > > >>There are two possibilities for how the subpackage affects upgrade: > >>1. if your subpackage depends on other packages, then the presence > >> of your subpackage can prevent the upgrade of those other packages. > >> Users might need to use --allowerasing to work around that, and we > >> don't want that, upgrades must be possible without --allowerasing. > > Okay, after thinking about this example, my package _would_ actually > have a problem on upgrade, so thanks for the example. > > >>2. if your subpackage does not depend on anything except python2, then > >> there is no immediate problem with upgrade (since python2 is staying > >> around for now), but the users of your package have an obsolete package > >> installed that is not being upgraded or supported. > > Actually, I think Zbyszek may be right that we need to worry about > this case. Say there is a python2 package that only depends on > python(abi) = 2.7 and this package is stopped from building. This > package will remain on user's systems. Then in Fedora 58, Python 2 > is finally removed. If the Python 2 packages are obsoleted, won't > this cause a problem with the original Python 2 subpackage? Yes, it will. Users will get a message from 'dnf upgrade' like "450 packages were not upgraded" (with a long list including python2 and the offending python2 subpackages). If users switch to "--best --allowerasing", the upgrade will go through, but at this scale users will not be able to tell if they are removing just obsolete packages or if in this list there are interspersed packages that they care about. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
