On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 12:42:12PM +0200, Ondrej Novy wrote: > Hi, > > ne 5. 7. 2020 v 18:46 odesílatel napsal: > > > Whenever things get stalled it is good to ask: > > > >Who is waiting on who? > > > > We have a rule between admins we are processing join request after few days > to give everyone chance to give their opinions. > > In this particular case it was my fault and overlooked that email. > > > I volunteer to be part of "Some administrator". > > > cool. Current admins needs to agree, so: @piotr, @stefanor, @kitterman, > @bzed: your opinions please? For what it is worth: Wiki addition https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/PythonModulesTeam/HowToJoin?action=diff=23=22 is from me, it says currently: Do known that it is okay to ask after 75 hours ''Who is waiting on who?''. > > Debian tradition I will be re-introducing is sending "done messages". > > > no need to re-introduce, I'm always sending welcome message :) I what to help with sending those welcome messages (which implies accepting the work that comes with it) And please enlighten me (and us (through the mailinglist)) what is holding back https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2020/07/msg00057.html Groeten Geert Stappers -- Silence is hard to parse signature.asc Description: PGP signature
On 7/9/20 9:31 PM, Ondrej Novy wrote: > * keep "python" command pointing to python2.7 if I'm upgrading > buster->bullseye with python2.7 installed. We are going to keep > python2.7 interpreter for bullseye, so don't break old "python" command > for third-parties apps/scripts/etc. (install python-is-python2 during > buster->bullseye upgrade) Please do break them. They are broken because they expect an interpreter which we don't support anymore. So they MUST break. Leaving the distro half-upgraded with the feeling that things are continuing to work is a horrible design. During the upgrade to bullseye, please do remove all things Python2, including the interpreter, unless explicitly requested by the user (if that's possible). If a user feels like he must install Python2, it must be a manual decision (maybe after the upgrade and using /usr/local ?). Otherwise, there's still Buster around for the next 4 years to come... Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 00:58:10 +0200 Bastian Germann wrote:> I am looking for a sponsor for the package "spyne" which has a > py2removal RC and a grave bug and was autoremoved from testing. The > package is Python 2 only but the current upstream version has Python 3 > support. I converted it to build a binary python3-spyne package. The > bugs are open long enough for a NMU. > > * Package name: spyne >Version : 2.13.15-0.1 >Upstream Author : Burak Arslan > * URL : http://spyne.io/ > * License : LGPL-2.1+ >Section : python > > It builds those binary packages: > > python3-spyne - Python library for writing and calling soap web service > > To access further information about this package, please visit the > following URL: > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/spyne > > Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: > > dget -x > https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/spyne/spyne_2.13.15-0.1.dsc One month has passed and no new spyne package has been released. Please consider sponsoring the package. The last upload is almost four years ago and it is RC-buggy for 11 months. There are people who depend on the package, so it would be great to have it back in Debian again.
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "freetype-py" * Package name: freetype-py Version : 2.2.0-1 Upstream Author : Nicolas P. Rougier * URL : https://github.com/rougier/freetype-py * License : BSD-3-clause * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/modules/freetype-py Section : python It builds those binary packages: python3-freetype - Freetype Python bindings for Python 3 To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/freetype-py Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/freetype-py/freetype-py_2.2.0-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Add tests control file * Update meta versions * gbp: Only keep pristine-tar config * New upstream version 2.2.0 * d/control: Build-depend on toml * Drop patch Regards, Bastian Germann
Piotr Ożarowski: > FTR: I didn't change my mind. /usr/bin/python is still used outside > Debian packages, in /usr/local/bin scripts and applications and I > strongly disagree to touch it. Sometimes breaking things can be helpful. If someone is not aware that something still requires Python 2.x, having that script start failing can often be helpful. As long as Debian provides a way to make /usr/bin/python point to 2.x, I think this kind of breakage will be useful since it makes it clear that the user is relying on totally unmaintained software. Arch has been using /usr/bin/python for Python 3.x for a while now. .hc
FTR: I didn't change my mind. /usr/bin/python is still used outside Debian packages, in /usr/local/bin scripts and applications and I strongly disagree to touch it. -- GPG: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645
Hi, po 13. 7. 2020 v 19:21 odesílatel Matthias Klose napsal: > On 7/13/20 6:23 PM, Fabrice BAUZAC-STEHLY wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Another solution would be to simply use the update-alternatives system > > to manage /usr/bin/python. python3 would have a higher priority than > > python2. Users would still have the possibility to switch > > /usr/bin/python to python2 explicitly if they require it... > > No, never ever. update-alternatives cannot be used because it breaks the > dependency system. > no, it doesn't. If all Python2 packages will use /usr/bin/python2 and all Python3 packages will use /usr/bin/python3, then /usr/bin/python can be managed by update-alternatives. And because we really want all Python2 packages to use /usr/bin/python2, I think this is a viable option. But TBH I don't think it's a good idea, because it can be confusing for users. -- Best regards Ondřej Nový