Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-12-08 Thread Stéphane Blondon
Le mer. 6 nov. 2019 à 23:49, Matthias Klose  a écrit :
>
> On 06.11.19 22:04, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> > Brian May  writes:
> >> Or maybe even expand as two bullet points:
> >>
> >> - Do not remove python-foo-doc.
> >> - Do not rename it to python3-foo-doc.
> >>
> >> I think this makes it very explicit what was intended.
> >
>
> please could one of you open an issue with a patch to track the change?

As we were discussing about sentences in
https://wiki.debian.org/Python/2Removal, I only modified the page
according to Brian's last proposal.

-- 
Stéphane



Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-11-06 Thread Matthias Klose

On 06.11.19 22:04, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:

Brian May  writes:


Stéphane Blondon  writes:


Perhaps there is a doubt how to read it?
- do not (remove python-foo-doc or rename it to python3-foo-doc)
- (do not remove python-foo-doc) or (rename it to python3-foo-doc)

Would it be better if we remove the indentation and use this sentence(?):
if documentation is in python-foo-doc, do not move it


Myself, I read it as the first option.

I would personally use:

- Do not remove python-foo-doc and do not rename it to python3-foo-doc.

Or maybe even expand as two bullet points:

- Do not remove python-foo-doc.
- Do not rename it to python3-foo-doc.

I think this makes it very explicit what was intended.


+1.  I also read it as (do (not (remove python-foo-doc) or (not (rename
to python3-foo-doc.  In natural language that "or" should be a
"nor", but breaking it into two negated bullet points may be clearer to
those whose first language doesn't possess a negative list operator.


please could one of you open an issue with a patch to track the change?

Thanks, Matthias



Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-11-06 Thread Nicholas D Steeves
Brian May  writes:

> Stéphane Blondon  writes:
>
>> Perhaps there is a doubt how to read it?
>> - do not (remove python-foo-doc or rename it to python3-foo-doc)
>> - (do not remove python-foo-doc) or (rename it to python3-foo-doc)
>>
>> Would it be better if we remove the indentation and use this sentence(?):
>> if documentation is in python-foo-doc, do not move it
>
> Myself, I read it as the first option.
>
> I would personally use:
>
> - Do not remove python-foo-doc and do not rename it to python3-foo-doc.
>
> Or maybe even expand as two bullet points:
>
> - Do not remove python-foo-doc.
> - Do not rename it to python3-foo-doc.
>
> I think this makes it very explicit what was intended.

+1.  I also read it as (do (not (remove python-foo-doc) or (not (rename
to python3-foo-doc.  In natural language that "or" should be a
"nor", but breaking it into two negated bullet points may be clearer to
those whose first language doesn't possess a negative list operator.

Cheers,
Nicholas


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-11-06 Thread Brian May
Stéphane Blondon  writes:

> Perhaps there is a doubt how to read it?
> - do not (remove python-foo-doc or rename it to python3-foo-doc)
> - (do not remove python-foo-doc) or (rename it to python3-foo-doc)
>
> Would it be better if we remove the indentation and use this sentence(?):
> if documentation is in python-foo-doc, do not move it

Myself, I read it as the first option.

I would personally use:

- Do not remove python-foo-doc and do not rename it to python3-foo-doc.

Or maybe even expand as two bullet points:

- Do not remove python-foo-doc.
- Do not rename it to python3-foo-doc.

I think this makes it very explicit what was intended.
--
Brian May 



Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-11-03 Thread Matthias Klose

On 03.11.19 15:09, Neil Williams wrote:

On Sun, 3 Nov 2019 15:00:17 +0100
Matthias Klose  wrote:


[discussing this outside the bug report on the ML]

On 03.11.19 14:39, Neil Williams wrote:

Actually, that's a good catch. I was mixing up the defaults package
with the general advice on python3 migration to not remove
python-foo-doc just to rename it to python3-foo-doc.


where did you read that? IMO we don't want to rename the -doc
packages.


https://wiki.debian.org/Python/2Removal

Check list

* if documentation was in python-foo - move it to python3-foo or python-foo-doc
   * if it was automatically placed there by dh_installdocs, it will 
automatically move to python-foo-doc: you don't need to do anything, unless you 
had links to it that need un-breaking
   * do not remove python-foo-doc or rename it to python3-foo-doc


yes, but this tells you not to rename it to python3-foo-doc.



Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-11-03 Thread Neil Williams
On Sun, 3 Nov 2019 15:00:17 +0100
Matthias Klose  wrote:

> [discussing this outside the bug report on the ML]
> 
> On 03.11.19 14:39, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Actually, that's a good catch. I was mixing up the defaults package
> > with the general advice on python3 migration to not remove
> > python-foo-doc just to rename it to python3-foo-doc.  
> 
> where did you read that? IMO we don't want to rename the -doc
> packages.

https://wiki.debian.org/Python/2Removal

Check list

* if documentation was in python-foo - move it to python3-foo or python-foo-doc
  * if it was automatically placed there by dh_installdocs, it will 
automatically move to python-foo-doc: you don't need to do anything, unless you 
had links to it that need un-breaking
  * do not remove python-foo-doc or rename it to python3-foo-doc

> 
> > Removing the defaults package python-doc seems right to me. I've
> > updated that paragraph.  


-- 


Neil Williams
=
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/



pgpofohEowY0B.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-11-03 Thread Matthias Klose

[discussing this outside the bug report on the ML]

On 03.11.19 14:39, Neil Williams wrote:

Actually, that's a good catch. I was mixing up the defaults package
with the general advice on python3 migration to not remove
python-foo-doc just to rename it to python3-foo-doc.


where did you read that? IMO we don't want to rename the -doc packages.


Removing the defaults package python-doc seems right to me. I've
updated that paragraph.