Re: Python 3 transition question

2019-09-04 Thread Martin Kelly

On 9/2/19 1:18 PM, Martin Kelly wrote:

On 9/1/19 10:07 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:



On September 2, 2019 4:00:53 AM UTC, Sandro Tosi  
wrote:

I would just stop building these.  And if the reverse dependencies

have a

py2removal bug itself, then comment in these issues that the
suggested/recommended package gets removed.  If they don't have a

py2removal

bug, please file the bugs for these packages.


i dont believe this is a sensible approach; for example i maintain
python-mpmath, that would be rendered uninstallable the moment
python-gmp2 is removed. Now, python-mpmath has 3 external
reverse-dependencies (just to name a couple, sagemath and simpy) that
would be then uninstallable, and so on and so forth for all their
rdeps.

Martin, i think for now the only option is to keep the py2 packages
around until we're ready to drop them (ie they have 0 rdeps).


I just checked on packages.d.o and according to it, python-gmp2 is a 
Suggests.  Suggests aren't installed with packages.  Unless I'm 
missing something, python-mpmath wouldn't become uninstallable.


IIRC, policy doesn't even require Suggests packages to exist.

I agree about keeping packages as long as they have reverse 
Recommends, but I think Suggests is going too far (although AIUI, 
missing Recommends don't make the package uninstallable either).


Scott K



If I'm summarizing correctly, it sounds like there is no policy on 
exactly what to do here. I think removing the package would be pretty 
bad, because gmpy is designed to speed up numerical libraries, and the 
performance hit without it would make many libraries really painful to 
use. Given this, perhaps the dependencies should be Recommends instead 
of Suggests.


The guidelines I saw in the bugs filed on my packages (e.g. bug #937791) 
say to "document" the reverse dependency. Where do I document this?


(ping). I'd like to resolve the bugs I have on my packages and am not 
sure yet how best to proceed.




Re: Python 3 transition question

2019-09-02 Thread Martin Kelly

On 9/1/19 10:07 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:



On September 2, 2019 4:00:53 AM UTC, Sandro Tosi  wrote:

I would just stop building these.  And if the reverse dependencies

have a

py2removal bug itself, then comment in these issues that the
suggested/recommended package gets removed.  If they don't have a

py2removal

bug, please file the bugs for these packages.


i dont believe this is a sensible approach; for example i maintain
python-mpmath, that would be rendered uninstallable the moment
python-gmp2 is removed. Now, python-mpmath has 3 external
reverse-dependencies (just to name a couple, sagemath and simpy) that
would be then uninstallable, and so on and so forth for all their
rdeps.

Martin, i think for now the only option is to keep the py2 packages
around until we're ready to drop them (ie they have 0 rdeps).


I just checked on packages.d.o and according to it, python-gmp2 is a Suggests.  
Suggests aren't installed with packages.  Unless I'm missing something, 
python-mpmath wouldn't become uninstallable.

IIRC, policy doesn't even require Suggests packages to exist.

I agree about keeping packages as long as they have reverse Recommends, but I 
think Suggests is going too far (although AIUI, missing Recommends don't make 
the package uninstallable either).

Scott K



If I'm summarizing correctly, it sounds like there is no policy on 
exactly what to do here. I think removing the package would be pretty 
bad, because gmpy is designed to speed up numerical libraries, and the 
performance hit without it would make many libraries really painful to 
use. Given this, perhaps the dependencies should be Recommends instead 
of Suggests.


The guidelines I saw in the bugs filed on my packages (e.g. bug #937791) 
say to "document" the reverse dependency. Where do I document this?




Re: Python 3 transition question

2019-09-01 Thread Sandro Tosi
> I would just stop building these.  And if the reverse dependencies have a
> py2removal bug itself, then comment in these issues that the
> suggested/recommended package gets removed.  If they don't have a py2removal
> bug, please file the bugs for these packages.

i dont believe this is a sensible approach; for example i maintain
python-mpmath, that would be rendered uninstallable the moment
python-gmp2 is removed. Now, python-mpmath has 3 external
reverse-dependencies (just to name a couple, sagemath and simpy) that
would be then uninstallable, and so on and so forth for all their
rdeps.

Martin, i think for now the only option is to keep the py2 packages
around until we're ready to drop them (ie they have 0 rdeps).

Regards,

--
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi



Re: Python 3 transition question

2019-09-01 Thread Matthias Klose

On 01.09.19 21:48, Martin Kelly wrote:

Hi,

I maintain python-gmpy and python-gmpy2, which need to transition to Python 3. 
However, they have several packages that have Suggests or Recommends (not a hard 
dependency) pointing to python-gmpy/python-gmpy2. These other packages appear to 
be Python 2 only.


Should I stop building the Python 2 versions of these packages (and invalidate 
the Suggests/Recommends of these other packages), or should I instead just 
document this issue? If I document it, where should this documentation go?


I would just stop building these.  And if the reverse dependencies have a 
py2removal bug itself, then comment in these issues that the 
suggested/recommended package gets removed.  If they don't have a py2removal 
bug, please file the bugs for these packages.