Hi, As the way to use python-coverage is to use /usr/bin/coverage, I am claiming that this bug is release critical, with severity "grave", the reason being:
"makes the package in question unusable by most or all users" The reason is that python-coverage users (said otherwise: reverse dependencies of python-coverage) are expecting to have the package providing /usr/bin/coverage, and otherwise fail to build a coverage HTML report. I have the case on many of the packages I maintain. Also, the pypi package does install /us/bin/coverage, so I don't see why the Debian package wouldn't. Please don't set the severity lower than it is right now. This issue *must* be addressed, in one way or another (I'm fine if update-alternatives isn't used, though I'm convinced that's the way to go). To the FTP masters, if you read this while reviewing the package in NEW: please don't hold this new version because of this bug. I'm convinced that we will see a resolution to this bug later on, and will make sure it happens. Once the new version is in, together with python3 support, an update fixing it can be quick. Note that both the maintainer (Ben Finney) and myself (packaging the needed 2 libjs dependencies it needed and reviewing the package for an upload) spent a large amount of time on the package already, and we both agree to postpone the resolution of this bug after 3.7 is in Sid. My intention is to raise the topic in the debian-python@ list, and see what others have to say about it. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
