On 9.10.2018 23:42, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 9.10.2018 22:51, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 03:14:41PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Is anyone willing to look into automating this? Write a spec
depython2izer?
Hi,
I wrote something that mostly seems to work:
https://pagure.io/pyrenamer/blob/master/f/depython2ize.py
../pyrenamer/depython2ize.py -b -d python-alchimia python-gzipstream \
python-ivi python-pdfkit python-simpleparse python-walkdir \
python-XStatic-Jasmine python-yourls ...
If does:
- removing python2- and python- BRs
yes
- removing %package -n python2 and it's metadata, description &
%files
yes
- removing all %py2_build, %py2_install or their older manual
variants
yes
- removing python2 tests from %check
yes
- (sometimes) removing %py3dir or python3 dir pushd/popd dance
yes (by default, can be disabled with a switch)
- (sometimes) removing with_python3 conditionals as they make
no sense
no
The workflow is to first calls it with just -bd for review, and then
with -bwn
to actually commit.
I tested it for packages from $(bugzilla query --blocked=1625773 -s NEW).
For the ones that are called python-* it seems to work, and quite a lot
of them even build fine. Sometimes manual fixups will be necessary (e.g.
when the py2 directories or files are referenced from %build in
non-trivial
ways).
For packages with generic names it doesn't work because python2
subpackage
detection is broken. Should be relatively easy to fix. I'll work on that
tomorrow, so please just ignore them for now.
PTAL. Let me know what bits are missing or buggy.
I'd also be happy to help with pushing some of those patches to
dist-git and doing the builds, but for this we need to coordinate.
Example patches: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/depy2/.
Thank You, Zbyszek,
this looks very good.
Before we start going wild and use this, there are 2 things we should
consider:
1) We should query bugzilla for NEW bugs without comments. Those with
comments can be hand-triaged later (it isn't be many). Some comments may
say OK, some may say STOP.
2) There is a list of packages to remove. We should use the list and
check if the script doesn't remove anything else (e.g. it may be that we
want to remove python2-foo-coolfeature, but we need to keep
python2-foo). The results are obtainable via [1] and I've copied my last
results to [2]. For every package the script wants to remove a check
should be made that pkgs[name]["verdict"] == "drop_now".
I'm writing this part now.
I'll try the script myself for a couple packages tomorrow.
For coordination: I was doing it in a way that I've assigned the bug to
me and changed to ASSIGNED, built, CLOSED RAWHIDE. I guess we can
continue doing this (individually or in bulks) and any number of
provenpackagers can proceed as long as [1]/[2] is checked.
[1] https://github.com/fedora-python/portingdb#check-drops
[2] https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/results.json
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
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
