Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 07/17/2018 04:35 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: ...snip... > > We want to keep them and we are able to maintain Python 2 for them > (well, we would very much prefer to have them ported to Python 3 but we > realize it's not always happening.) Well, if something is broken in python2, breaking one of

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

; >>>> From: "R P Herrold" >>>> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" >>>> >>>> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 8:57:11 PM >>>> Subject: Re: Intent to orphan Python 2 >>>> >>>> On Mon, 16 J

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 18.7.2018 00:03, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On 07/16/2018 11:15 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: This is just a reminder that nobody stepped up to maintain Python 2 after 2020. We still need to start dropping python2 packages. What shall we do from here? File a Fedora System Wide Change Proposal for Fedora

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 07/16/2018 11:15 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > This is just a reminder that nobody stepped up to maintain Python 2 > after 2020. We still need to start dropping python2 packages. > > What shall we do from here? File a Fedora System Wide Change Proposal > for Fedora 30 that nothing explicitly

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 17.7.2018 14:16, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote: - Original Message - From: "R P Herrold" To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 8:57:11 PM Subject: Re: Intent to orp

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 6:18 PM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote: > > > - Original Message - >> From: "R P Herrold" >> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" >> >> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 8:57:11 PM >> Subject: Re

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

- Original Message - > From: "R P Herrold" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 8:57:11 PM > Subject: Re: Intent to orphan Python 2 > > On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > On

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 23.3.2018 12:23, Petr Viktorin wrote: > > tl;dr: Unless someone steps up to maintain Python 2 after 2020, we need > > to start dropping python2 packages now. tl;dr: --- that statement by itself overlooks the obvious. Not ALL packages become

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 23.3.2018 12:23, Petr Viktorin wrote: tl;dr: Unless someone steps up to maintain Python 2 after 2020, we need to start dropping python2 packages now. Python 2.7 will reach end of upstream support on 1st of January, 2020, after almost 10 years (!) of volunteer maintenance. Fedora still has

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 04/08/18 17:49, Kevin Kofler wrote: Rex Dieter wrote: And we've circled back to the original post starting this thread. Note: intent to *orphan*, not intent to *retire*. If it is not going to be retired, then why would we want to kill python2-* subpackages throughout the distribution for

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 12:55:04AM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: > > ZJ> Please don't. This is a repeat of the original idea of having > ZJ> separate python3 packages back when python3 was being > ZJ> introduced. > > It

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: ZJ> Please don't. This is a repeat of the original idea of having ZJ> separate python3 packages back when python3 was being ZJ> introduced. It seems that you are suggesting that pointless bureaucracy be kept in place purely

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Rex Dieter wrote: >> And we've circled back to the original post starting this thread. >> >> Note: intent to *orphan*, not intent to *retire*. > > If it is not going to be retired, then why would we want to kill

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

Rex Dieter wrote: > And we've circled back to the original post starting this thread. > > Note: intent to *orphan*, not intent to *retire*. If it is not going to be retired, then why would we want to kill python2-* subpackages throughout the distribution for no reason? Kevin Kofler

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

Kevin Kofler wrote: > Somebody needs to pick it up. > ... > I see no benefit from removing the python2 > package in such a rush. And we've circled back to the original post starting this thread. Note: intent to *orphan*, not intent to *retire*. -- Rex

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

Peter Oliver wrote: > In any case, once we start removing Python 2 components, it seems to me > that the message to users is, "Python 2 can't be relied upon in this > release". That being the case, if we did go ahead with this staged > removal, would it be helpful to think of this change the

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Sat, 7 Apr 2018, 19:17 Miro Hrončok, wrote: Strong reasons for the distribution were already discussed above, including: > > * we don't have the ability/mapower to remove everything at once > Won't it take more total effort to remove things piecemeal rather than all in

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 04/06/2018 02:18 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: > Is there some list of packages Ansible depends on? Nope. I don't think there could be either. (Or at least not a very good one). You could possibly scrape the core modules shipped with ansible, but thats going to give you tons of things that aren't

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 04/05/2018 05:10 PM, Eric Garver wrote: ...snip... > Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't this be a nuisance in Ansible for > some time? If the controller side (regardless of distro) defaults to > invoking python2 on the remote then it will fail on f29+. I guess > Ansible has knobs to tell it

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 7.4.2018 18:45, Kevin Kofler wrote> How about just NOT removing the subpackage to begin with if there is no strong reason to (such as upstream dropping support)? The strong reason for me as a packager might be "I don't want to maintain this crap anymore, I see no benefit in it." Strong

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 11:09 +0100, James Hogarth wrote: > There's a good reason we have the change deadlines we do - and > honestly I think dropping a subpackage (as opposed to retiring which > is more visible) is sufficiently disruptive (and annoyingly invisible > otherwise) that it should go

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

Miro Hrončok wrote: > So apparently the general confusion/problem here is lack of > communication when removing python2-subpackages. > > Filling a Fedora Change proposal for every single python2 subpackage > removal feels a bit overengineered. So let's set up some basic rules > about what to do

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 04:15:15PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 7.4.2018 15:53, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > >On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:33:04AM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>To be completely honest, if someone wants to drop a python2 subpackage, > >>that's their prerogative

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 7.4.2018 15:53, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:33:04AM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: To be completely honest, if someone wants to drop a python2 subpackage, that's their prerogative but it does bring up an interesting question. Normally if someone wants to

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:33:04AM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > To be completely honest, if someone wants to drop a python2 subpackage, > that's their prerogative but it does bring up an interesting question. > Normally if someone wants to orphan a package, they're welcome to do so > and

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 11:18:13AM +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote: > On 04/04/18 18:21, James Hogarth wrote: > [...] > >Can we please get some consistency here? > > > >I noted today that firewalld has dropped python2-firewall but of > >course ansible isn't switching to py3 for the controller (and >

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

> "CS" == Charalampos Stratakis writes: CS> On a relevant note, python packaging guidelines are soon subject for CS> a change in regards to that [0] CS> [0] https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/753 Please note that the ticket there started off as a strong

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

- Original Message - > From: "James Hogarth" <james.hoga...@gmail.com> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Friday, April 6, 2018 12:09:10 PM > Subject: Re: Intent to orphan Python

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 6 April 2018 at 10:18, Petr Viktorin wrote: > On 04/04/18 18:21, James Hogarth wrote: > [...] >> >> Can we please get some consistency here? >> >> I noted today that firewalld has dropped python2-firewall but of course >> ansible isn't switching to py3 for the controller

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 6 April 2018 at 01:10, Eric Garver wrote: > On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 10:53:03PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:06 PM, James Hogarth >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, 18:28 Matthew Miller,

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 04/04/18 18:21, James Hogarth wrote: [...] Can we please get some consistency here? I noted today that firewalld has dropped python2-firewall but of course ansible isn't switching to py3 for the controller (and therefore local) until F29 and not all python modules are py3 compatible yet...

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

- Original Message - > From: "Fabio Valentini" <decatho...@gmail.com> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 10:53:03 PM > Subject: Re: Intent to orphan Pyth

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 10:53:03PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:06 PM, James Hogarth wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, 18:28 Matthew Miller, wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 04:03:24PM +, James

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:06 PM, James Hogarth wrote: > > > On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, 18:28 Matthew Miller, wrote: >> >> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 04:03:24PM +, James Hogarth wrote: >> > > I'm imagining all those dependent packages _also_ moving to

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, 18:28 Matthew Miller, wrote: > On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 04:03:24PM +, James Hogarth wrote: > > > I'm imagining all those dependent packages _also_ moving to that > > > module > > Sorry Matthew but I can't see that actually happening at all...

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 04:03:24PM +, James Hogarth wrote: > > I'm imagining all those dependent packages _also_ moving to that > > module > Sorry Matthew but I can't see that actually happening at all... > > If they are already leaping to drop python2-* way ahead of the proposed EOL > of

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Thu, 5 Apr 2018, 16:05 Matthew Miller, wrote: > On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 03:11:47PM +0100, James Hogarth wrote: > > But it's not python2 itself going that is really the painful part of > > this ... it's the various python2-* packages going bye-bye as > > maintainers

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 03:11:47PM +0100, James Hogarth wrote: > But it's not python2 itself going that is really the painful part of > this ... it's the various python2-* packages going bye-bye as > maintainers (are already) dropping them... even when they still work. > > Having a module of

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 5 April 2018 at 13:23, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 11:58:57AM +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote: >> And if you read the original mail to the end, you'll find that our >> position is not as black-and-white as it might look from the Subject >> line. >> As

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 11:58:57AM +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote: > And if you read the original mail to the end, you'll find that our > position is not as black-and-white as it might look from the Subject > line. > As Python SIG we maintain old Python versions like 2.6 or 3.3 > *today* – but just

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 4 April 2018 at 22:06, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 04/04/2018 01:35 PM, James Hogarth wrote: >> On Wed, 4 Apr 2018, 21:28 Adam Williamson, >> wrote: >> >>> This rather begs the question of whether there are any modules which >>> only work *with python

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 04/04/2018 01:35 PM, James Hogarth wrote: > On Wed, 4 Apr 2018, 21:28 Adam Williamson, > wrote: > >> This rather begs the question of whether there are any modules which >> only work *with python 2*, though... The answer is (at least based on what I know from

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

Adam Williamson (adamw...@fedoraproject.org) said: > This rather begs the question of whether there are any modules which > only work *with python 2*, though... Given 1500+ modules, all of which can have their own python library dependencies, the safe answer is 'yes'. We're working to solve

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Wed, 4 Apr 2018, 21:28 Adam Williamson, wrote: > On Wed, 2018-04-04 at 10:51 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On 04/04/2018 10:46 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > On 04/04/2018 09:21 AM, James Hogarth wrote: > > > > > > ...snip... > > > > > > > Can we please get some

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Wed, 4 Apr 2018, 18:52 Kevin Fenzi, wrote: > On 04/04/2018 10:46 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On 04/04/2018 09:21 AM, James Hogarth wrote: > > > > ...snip... > > > >> Can we please get some consistency here? > >> > >> I noted today that firewalld has dropped python2-firewall

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Wed, 2018-04-04 at 10:51 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 04/04/2018 10:46 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On 04/04/2018 09:21 AM, James Hogarth wrote: > > > > ...snip... > > > > > Can we please get some consistency here? > > > > > > I noted today that firewalld has dropped python2-firewall but of

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 04/04/2018 10:46 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 04/04/2018 09:21 AM, James Hogarth wrote: > > ...snip... > >> Can we please get some consistency here? >> >> I noted today that firewalld has dropped python2-firewall but of course >> ansible isn't switching to py3 for the controller (and therefore

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 04/04/2018 09:21 AM, James Hogarth wrote: ...snip... > Can we please get some consistency here? > > I noted today that firewalld has dropped python2-firewall but of course > ansible isn't switching to py3 for the controller (and therefore local) > until F29 and not all python modules are py3

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Mon, 26 Mar 2018, 10:59 Petr Viktorin, wrote: > On 03/24/18 15:28, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Petr Viktorin wrote: > >> As with any orphaning, that leaves two options: > >> - someone else agrees now to take over in 2020 (keeping in mind this is > >> a security-critical

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/24/18 15:28, Kevin Kofler wrote: Petr Viktorin wrote: As with any orphaning, that leaves two options: - someone else agrees now to take over in 2020 (keeping in mind this is a security-critical package and will be abandoned upstream), or IMHO, this is clearly the right thing to do. I

OT: Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

> > On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 08:56:02PM +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote: > On Sat, 24 Mar 2018 23:12:31 + > "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > Just curious: better programming environments … such us? > Anything in the ML family of course. So, in looking it up, those languages

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 25.3.2018 14:25, Kevin Kofler wrote: I am all for kicking out Python 2 from things such as live images if it is still on them, for space reasons. But I think it needs to remain available in the repository. And we are not saying "python2 needs to get out", we are saying "somebody needs to

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

Silvia Sánchez wrote: > First, I agree with Richard that packaging two versions is painful. It's > also confusing from the other side. "Install Python. I already have it. > No, that's Python2, you need Python3. (O_O)" The packages are already renamed or being renamed to python2*, and the plan

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

Hi everyone, First, I agree with Richard that packaging two versions is painful. It's also confusing from the other side. "Install Python. I already have it. No, that's Python2, you need Python3. (O_O)" Second, I think the earlier we start the better. So there's time to cut leafs and replace

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 08:56:02PM +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote: > On 2018-03-24, 15:09 GMT, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > I'm not personally a fan of either variant of the language > > - it's silly that we let programmers use an unsafe, slow, interpreted > > scripting language when we've known how to

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 2018-03-24, 15:09 GMT, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > I'm not personally a fan of either variant of the language > - it's silly that we let programmers use an unsafe, slow, interpreted > scripting language when we've known how to make better programming > environments for at least 40 years. Just

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 04:07:51PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 03/23/2018 12:23 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote: > >tl;dr: Unless someone steps up to maintain Python 2 after 2020, we > >need to start dropping python2 packages now. > Bummer - I am speechless. > > >Python 2.7 will reach end of

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

Petr Viktorin wrote: > As with any orphaning, that leaves two options: > - someone else agrees now to take over in 2020 (keeping in mind this is > a security-critical package and will be abandoned upstream), or IMHO, this is clearly the right thing to do. I have been doing security backports for

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 12:57:19 -0400, you wrote: >On 03/23/2018 07:23 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: >> In case no one steps up, we'd like to start dropping Python 2 support >> from dependent packages *now*, starting with ported libraries on whose >> python2 version nothing in Fedora depends. (We keep a

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/23/18 17:57, Randy Barlow wrote: On 03/23/2018 07:23 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: In case no one steps up, we'd like to start dropping Python 2 support from dependent packages *now*, starting with ported libraries on whose python2 version nothing in Fedora depends. (We keep a list of those at

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/23/2018 07:23 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: > In case no one steps up, we'd like to start dropping Python 2 support > from dependent packages *now*, starting with ported libraries on whose > python2 version nothing in Fedora depends. (We keep a list of those at > [1].) I'm +1 to the idea of

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 23.3.2018 15:16, Jerry James wrote: And please don't start dropping python 2 subpackages that are actually used by other packages in Fedora without talking to the maintainers first. I just got bitten by this change to python-nose-cov: * Thu Mar 22 2018 John Dulaney

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/23/2018 11:07 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Face it, your plan is naive and has failed even before it begun. This is not useful feedback, and is hostile. Please use only constructive criticism in the future. ___ devel mailing list --

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/23/2018 12:23 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote: tl;dr: Unless someone steps up to maintain Python 2 after 2020, we need to start dropping python2 packages now. Bummer - I am speechless. Python 2.7 will reach end of upstream support on 1st of January, 2020, after almost 10 years (!) of volunteer

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 7:29 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote: > Just a note of warning: don’t to be too over-eager with dropping > everything Python 2 related in EPEL-7. Its EOS is only sometime > after 2024 > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Product_life_cycle) > and

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 2018-03-23, 11:23 GMT, Petr Viktorin wrote: > Python 2.7 will reach end of upstream support on 1st of > January, 2020, after almost 10 years (!) of volunteer > maintenance. Just a note of warning: don’t to be too over-eager with dropping everything Python 2 related in EPEL-7. Its EOS is

Intent to orphan Python 2

tl;dr: Unless someone steps up to maintain Python 2 after 2020, we need to start dropping python2 packages now. Python 2.7 will reach end of upstream support on 1st of January, 2020, after almost 10 years (!) of volunteer maintenance. Fedora still has more than 3000 packages depending on

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/20/18 21:47, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 04:11:46PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 03:28:23PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 20.3.2018 14:45, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: Indeed, I'm using those python packages like

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 04:11:46PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 03:28:23PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 20.3.2018 14:45, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > >Indeed, I'm using those python packages like a dinosaur ;) > > > > :D > > > > >What about

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 20.3.2018 17:11, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: Should a Fedora Change for that release be crafted that says "Mass python2 packages removal"? Yeah, I think it should be filed as a F29 change. I think we should send the e-mail first and do that after, if nobody takes python2. --

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 03:28:23PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 20.3.2018 14:45, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > >Indeed, I'm using those python packages like a dinosaur ;) > > :D > > >What about adding conditionals like > > > >%if 0%{?rhel} > 7 || 0%{?fedora} > 31 > ># Disable python2

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 03/20/18 14:45, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:23:06PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 20.3.2018 11:25, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: to push the whole ecosystem. The proposed model of nipping python2 support at the edges is the same thing, in reverse.

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 20.3.2018 14:45, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: Indeed, I'm using those python packages like a dinosaur ;) :D What about adding conditionals like %if 0%{?rhel} > 7 || 0%{?fedora} > 31 # Disable python2 build by default %bcond_with python2 %else %bcond_without python2 %endif starting

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On 20.3.2018 11:25, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: to push the whole ecosystem. The proposed model of nipping python2 support at the edges is the same thing, in reverse. First some leaf packages are dropped, and then some somewhat more important packages, and then suddenly it becomes hard to

Re: Intent to orphan Python 2

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:51:30AM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote: > Hello, > Here is a message I want to post to devel-announce later. Let me > know if you see anything wrong (or would like to take over python2 > maintainership). > > --- > Intent to orphan Python 2 First

Intent to orphan Python 2

Hello, Here is a message I want to post to devel-announce later. Let me know if you see anything wrong (or would like to take over python2 maintainership). --- Intent to orphan Python 2 tl;dr: Unless someone steps up to Python 2 after 2020, we need to start dropping python2 packages now