Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-03 Thread Ben Finney
Brian May writes: > I just noticed that Ubuntu plan to drop Python 2.7 completely - from > default installs at least That's a pretty important modifier! Ubuntu does not yet plan to drop Python 2.7 completely. Rather, the current plan is to ensure no *dependencies on*

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-03 Thread Brian May
On 2017-04-04 08:21, Brian May wrote: > I would suggest that Buster have Python 2.7, however we only support 3rd > party libraries where it is practical to do so. Any library that has > dropped Python 2.7 support upstream, is not practical for us to support > in Python2. Anything that depends on

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-03 Thread Brian May
Vincent Bernat writes: > On the current subject, I also agree we should not drop prematurely > packages targeted to Python 2. It is likely the support will be extended > past 2020, at least by distributions with a 10-year support. RHEL 7 will be supported until 2024.

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-02 Thread Vincent Bernat
❦ 2 avril 2017 09:45 +0100, Ghislain Vaillant  : >>> it's just a few lines down in the changelog: >>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=829744 (it is kinda >>> sad that there was no discussion with the python team from the lintian >>> maintainer before

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-02 Thread Vincent Bernat
❦ 2 avril 2017 10:21 +0100, Chris Lamb  : >> > On the current subject, I also agree we should not drop prematurely >> > packages targeted to Python 2. > > The Lintian tag in question does not suggest maintainers should be > removing existing Python 2 support from packages. > >

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-02 Thread Chris Lamb
Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > > On the current subject, I also agree we should not drop prematurely > > packages targeted to Python 2. The Lintian tag in question does not suggest maintainers should be removing existing Python 2 support from packages. It merely suggests that you should think twice

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-02 Thread Ghislain Vaillant
On 02/04/17 08:39, Vincent Bernat wrote: ❦ 1 avril 2017 19:42 -0400, Sandro Tosi : It's not at all clear where [1] came from. The lintian changelog [3] does not give a bug reference and I couldn't find a bug. it's just a few lines down in the changelog:

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-02 Thread Vincent Bernat
❦ 1 avril 2017 19:42 -0400, Sandro Tosi  : >> It's not at all clear where [1] came from. The lintian changelog [3] does >> not >> give a bug reference and I couldn't find a bug. > > it's just a few lines down in the changelog: >

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-01 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Saturday, April 01, 2017 05:12:38 PM Ghislain Vaillant wrote: >> On Sat, 2017-04-01 at 15:55 +, Scott Kitterman wrote: >> > On April 1, 2017 3:42:50 AM EDT, Ghislain Vaillant > wrote: >> > >

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-01 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Saturday, April 01, 2017 05:12:38 PM Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > On Sat, 2017-04-01 at 15:55 +, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > On April 1, 2017 3:42:50 AM EDT, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > > > ... > > > > > > How so? Buster will not be supporting Python 2, so the narrative

Re: Fwd: next version of csvkit

2017-04-01 Thread Scott Kitterman
On April 1, 2017 3:42:50 AM EDT, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: >... > >How so? Buster will not be supporting Python 2, so the narrative of >having new source packages only provide Python 3 binary packages is >totally justified. What makes you think this is true? As far as I