Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:08:26AM +0300, Joonas Niilola wrote:
>
> On 6/27/20 2:28 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> >
> > TL;DR: Please make it easier to search on the QA reports site for
> > issues, and only show things directly relevant to the search.
> >
> > A long time ago, there was blizzy's site that listed packages that were
> > stabilization candidates, and you could filter by developer. It really
> > helped making it easier to detect and progress.
>
> $ pkgcheck --color true scan $(git grep -l robb...@gentoo.org
> '**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2) -c StableRequestCheck -R
> FormatReporter --format 'stabilize {category}/{package}-{version} # {desc}'
>
> There's also a bug open to integrate some of the pkgchecks to p.g.o,
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/725704
Yep, this ties to the large scope of making it easier to show QA issues
from many sources/checks, filtering by many ways.
> > At a bare minimum, having an on-site way that already expands the data
> > and makes it searchable by developer.
>
> You can filter the output.html per-dev/per-project, but it's not as
> verbose as running pkgcheck locally can be.
>
> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/output.html;maintainer=robbat2
> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/output.verbose.html;maintainer=robbat2
The maintainer= flag also doesn't seem documented anywhere? (I checked
the source and see the 'include-projects' flag as well, so it's just a
matter of making this stuff much better known and a little bit cleaner.
> It doesn't straight out show python2 like this, but with the
> package.deprecated entry for it, it'll flag newly added py2 commits.
Also it's broken in the XML machine-readable version :-(.
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/output.xml;maintainer=robbat2
returns a 404
--
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Treasurer
E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On 6/27/20 2:28 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>
> TL;DR: Please make it easier to search on the QA reports site for
> issues, and only show things directly relevant to the search.
>
> A long time ago, there was blizzy's site that listed packages that were
> stabilization candidates, and you could filter by developer. It really
> helped making it easier to detect and progress.
$ pkgcheck --color true scan $(git grep -l robb...@gentoo.org
'**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2) -c StableRequestCheck -R
FormatReporter --format 'stabilize {category}/{package}-{version} # {desc}'
There's also a bug open to integrate some of the pkgchecks to p.g.o,
https://bugs.gentoo.org/725704
>
> At a bare minimum, having an on-site way that already expands the data
> and makes it searchable by developer.
You can filter the output.html per-dev/per-project, but it's not as
verbose as running pkgcheck locally can be.
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/output.html;maintainer=robbat2
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/output.verbose.html;maintainer=robbat2
It doesn't straight out show python2 like this, but with the
package.deprecated entry for it, it'll flag newly added py2 commits.
-- juippis
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 01:48:31PM -0400, Aaron Bauman wrote: > So, thanks for proving my point that all the tooling changes, notices, > ML posts, etc don't matter. Someone *will* find something to complain > about. They will also complain about the status quo, you won't win there! > >2. The report does not list maintainers, which means nobody is likely > >to know they have a package on the list. > > > > Do you argue just to argue? Sad. If someone like Robin (who at one > point had like 5% of the tree under his maintainer ship) complained > about that I may see it worthwhile. Some of the packages shown on the py27 list I had LONG forgotten that I maintained: I'll try and get to fixing them now. I did q-text-as-data this week, because I actually needed it for a quick project and I haven't used it since I changed my default python away from py27 last month. > Just another red herring... I'm mostly speaking to the QA team here, and Python team indirectly: Indirectly because the Python team is one of the few teams to step up and provide QA checks outside of the QA team directly. This thread however has shown that output of those checks however needs to become easier to consume. TL;DR: Please make it easier to search on the QA reports site for issues, and only show things directly relevant to the search. A long time ago, there was blizzy's site that listed packages that were stabilization candidates, and you could filter by developer. It really helped making it easier to detect and progress. At a bare minimum, having an on-site way that already expands the data and makes it searchable by developer. Have files like https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/py2.txt directly loaded into qa-reports and expanded out (which is cachable) and then let devs search w/ their browser. cat/package:slot (reason) (all-direct-maintainers),(expanded-projects) get-git-file.sh tries very hard to get there for the gentoo-ci output, needs performance and usability improvements, but it's vastly better than the py2.txt file already. Some issues: - Make it more visible! Right now you have to have a link to it from somewhere else, and it doesn't accept a branch name (https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/HEAD/output.html returns 404) - Why does it take 15 seconds to load? - Add filter by developers (by direct maintainer OR membership in alias) - Add filter by package/cat - Add filter by check name - Machine-readable format should be the same data as human-readable (I can't just take the .xml and grep it, it doesn't have maintainers at all) > >> See above. Qa-reports will output a very nice list (even a graphic!) > >of such things. Anyway, yes, I do expect devs to understand their > >packages state if they maintain it. Don't be so myopic. > > > >Well, you can expect whatever you want, and then you can be frustrated > >out of your mind when 95% of devs fail to meet your expectations. > > > I am not frustrated. I will continue to perform the same in intervals to > drive the removal of Py2. Can we have that graphic in a searchable text format? <3. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Treasurer E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On June 26, 2020 11:08:35 AM EDT, Rich Freeman wrote: >On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:36 AM Aaron Bauman wrote: >> >> On June 26, 2020 7:13:07 AM EDT, Rich Freeman >wrote: >> >> Of all the methods listed in the previous posts, the QA reports, >etc. >> >> there is no excuse individuals can't find out if their package is >py2 >> >> only. >> > >> >None of those methods were posted until a day or two ago, and the >> >python team has done nothing to actually ensure all the impacted >> >maintainers are aware of them. Perhaps a communication to >> >-dev-announce with the preferred approach would be better? >> > >> >> You should also look at qa-reports. Do we really need to *teach* >others "how to fish" here? Why can't folks just ask for assistance? > >Just looked at it: > >1. I had no idea that a list of py2-only packages was listed there. >I don't think I've ever actually looked at that page. > Perfect, so you have just shown that you either didn't see the ML posts about QA tools, didn't care to ask other devs what tools are available etc. If history serves me right, qa-reports has existed for many years (of which I have used it) and mgorny often let's folks know about changes to it (e.g. pkgcore). So, thanks for proving my point that all the tooling changes, notices, ML posts, etc don't matter. Someone *will* find something to complain about. >2. The report does not list maintainers, which means nobody is likely >to know they have a package on the list. > Do you argue just to argue? Sad. If someone like Robin (who at one point had like 5% of the tree under his maintainer ship) complained about that I may see it worthwhile. Just another red herring... >> >> See above. Qa-reports will output a very nice list (even a graphic!) >of such things. Anyway, yes, I do expect devs to understand their >packages state if they maintain it. Don't be so myopic. > >Well, you can expect whatever you want, and then you can be frustrated >out of your mind when 95% of devs fail to meet your expectations. > I am not frustrated. I will continue to perform the same in intervals to drive the removal of Py2. >Or you could just work with them where they're at and maybe get your >project completed more quickly and with less effort... > ::yawn:: see above remarks showing how folks will find a way to complain. >If you want people to look at a qa-report, maybe post on -dev-announce >and ask everybody to do it? Most people aren't going to be following >all the tools used by the python team if they aren't python devs. > >> >At least some devs here seemed surprised about the masks. Did you >try >> >filing a bug? >> >> Have you looked for said bugs? > >Of course. Do you think I'd invite such an obvious reply without >actually checking. > >I just went to the first complaint on this list about there not being >a bug, and verified that there wasn't a bug. > >As far as I can tell there is no bug for app-misc/golly. If I missed >one feel free to cite it. > >> >> > >> >Masking something for all users is basically like torturing a kitten >> >to get the attention of its owner. It is a necessary step if the >> >package is actually to be removed. I don't think it is even >allowable >> >under our policies if no bug was filed. >> > >> >> Do tell where said policy is? > >https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/package-maintainers/index.html > >Granted, a mask isn't a package commit, but I think the spirit of the >policy covers it. > >In any case, there is no reason not to communicate with a maintainer >before touching a package. That should involve something more than a >generic notice that everybody should become a detective to figure out >if they are covered by an upcoming change. If you have a list of >impacted packages, then just file bugs against them. > >> >> Nothing is really hard about masking packages for removal... >honestly. > >The complaint isn't that masks are hard on you. The complaint is that >it bombards users with unnecessary warnings. > Sadly, many users have contributed more than some devs to fix packages. I often get emails directly from users wanting to fix things. I will start forwarding them to you. >> The work comes in defending the position here for the few that >complain. > >And how are you enjoying doing all that extra work? Would you prefer >if devs started opening up QA/Comrel bugs that you then have to >formally respond to? > There is one open now. Seems QA hasn't spoken up yet... >Or maybe you could try notifying devs before masking their packages? > >> If I filed a bug... they would complain or not respond... If I sent >out a dev-announce they would complain or not respond. > >Sometimes, sure. But at least you would have gone through due >process, and you're unlikely to get much push back. > >And I suspect a number of those packages would actually get fixed. > >> >> You see the fun here? Which method is effective? Mask a 100 packages >for removal... Someone complains... A
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:36 AM Aaron Bauman wrote: > > On June 26, 2020 7:13:07 AM EDT, Rich Freeman wrote: > >> Of all the methods listed in the previous posts, the QA reports, etc. > >> there is no excuse individuals can't find out if their package is py2 > >> only. > > > >None of those methods were posted until a day or two ago, and the > >python team has done nothing to actually ensure all the impacted > >maintainers are aware of them. Perhaps a communication to > >-dev-announce with the preferred approach would be better? > > > > You should also look at qa-reports. Do we really need to *teach* others "how > to fish" here? Why can't folks just ask for assistance? Just looked at it: 1. I had no idea that a list of py2-only packages was listed there. I don't think I've ever actually looked at that page. 2. The report does not list maintainers, which means nobody is likely to know they have a package on the list. > > See above. Qa-reports will output a very nice list (even a graphic!) of such > things. Anyway, yes, I do expect devs to understand their packages state if > they maintain it. Don't be so myopic. Well, you can expect whatever you want, and then you can be frustrated out of your mind when 95% of devs fail to meet your expectations. Or you could just work with them where they're at and maybe get your project completed more quickly and with less effort... If you want people to look at a qa-report, maybe post on -dev-announce and ask everybody to do it? Most people aren't going to be following all the tools used by the python team if they aren't python devs. > >At least some devs here seemed surprised about the masks. Did you try > >filing a bug? > > Have you looked for said bugs? Of course. Do you think I'd invite such an obvious reply without actually checking. I just went to the first complaint on this list about there not being a bug, and verified that there wasn't a bug. As far as I can tell there is no bug for app-misc/golly. If I missed one feel free to cite it. > > > > >Masking something for all users is basically like torturing a kitten > >to get the attention of its owner. It is a necessary step if the > >package is actually to be removed. I don't think it is even allowable > >under our policies if no bug was filed. > > > > Do tell where said policy is? https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/package-maintainers/index.html Granted, a mask isn't a package commit, but I think the spirit of the policy covers it. In any case, there is no reason not to communicate with a maintainer before touching a package. That should involve something more than a generic notice that everybody should become a detective to figure out if they are covered by an upcoming change. If you have a list of impacted packages, then just file bugs against them. > > Nothing is really hard about masking packages for removal... honestly. The complaint isn't that masks are hard on you. The complaint is that it bombards users with unnecessary warnings. > The work comes in defending the position here for the few that complain. And how are you enjoying doing all that extra work? Would you prefer if devs started opening up QA/Comrel bugs that you then have to formally respond to? Or maybe you could try notifying devs before masking their packages? > If I filed a bug... they would complain or not respond... If I sent out a > dev-announce they would complain or not respond. Sometimes, sure. But at least you would have gone through due process, and you're unlikely to get much push back. And I suspect a number of those packages would actually get fixed. > > You see the fun here? Which method is effective? Mask a 100 packages for > removal... Someone complains... A few packages get saved and 90 get > removed... Life goes on. Would you want a dev to just mask one of your packages if they saw a bug in it, without bothering to open a bug? -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On June 26, 2020 7:13:07 AM EDT, Rich Freeman wrote: >On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 11:07 PM Aaron Bauman wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 04:21:14PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: >> > >> > We're removing python2 around . You can help us out by >updating >> > any packages you have that use python2. If you want to easily >> > identify these packages just do . >> > >> > I think the problem here is that we're basically telling >maintainers >> > that the beatings will continue until morale improves. Then we're >> > wondering why nothing is getting done. >> > >> >> I am thoroughly confused here. Some how you have completely changed >your >> opinion from previous posts. > >Perhaps we failed to communicate then. My opinion has always been >this: > >I support letting the python team manage the versions of python >available - if people want legacy versions to stick around they need >to do something to make it happen. > >HOWEVER, the python team would also find its job much easier if they >partnered with the myriad of package maintainers to accomplish their >goals, instead of just throwing them over the fence and then breaking >things for users to try to get everybody's attention periodically. > How have we *not* partnered with the community of devs? Michal's mails to the list? Previous discussions based on masks... >> >> Of all the methods listed in the previous posts, the QA reports, etc. >> there is no excuse individuals can't find out if their package is py2 >> only. > >None of those methods were posted until a day or two ago, and the >python team has done nothing to actually ensure all the impacted >maintainers are aware of them. Perhaps a communication to >-dev-announce with the preferred approach would be better? > You should also look at qa-reports. Do we really need to *teach* others "how to fish" here? Why can't folks just ask for assistance? All of it has been there and widely available for quite some time. Stop finding excuses. >You can't expect every Gentoo dev to independently cobble together a >bunch of scripts to go hunting for py2 reverse deps. > See above. Qa-reports will output a very nice list (even a graphic!) of such things. Anyway, yes, I do expect devs to understand their packages state if they maintain it. Don't be so myopic. >> Ironically, it would be a very sad state if an individual doesn't >know >> what Python interpreter their package is compatible with. This is the >> essence of "maintainer" status, correct? > >Maintainers generally care about what the package does, and how it >does it is a means to an end. Sure, some care more about the build >system and dependencies than others, and when working on a package you >need to pay more attention to such things. However, I suspect most >package maintainers do not know off the top of their head the >dependency list of all their packages. > >> Obviously, the myriad of tools, ML threads, and all the other >"avenues" >> individual developers have taken to alert others simply doesn't >work... >> until something is p.masked... people don't budge. > >At least some devs here seemed surprised about the masks. Did you try >filing a bug? Have you looked for said bugs? > >Masking something for all users is basically like torturing a kitten >to get the attention of its owner. It is a necessary step if the >package is actually to be removed. I don't think it is even allowable >under our policies if no bug was filed. > Do tell where said policy is? >But if filing bugs is painful at least make things easier on >maintainers. Post a list of packages and owners, for example. > >It just seems like you're making things harder on yourself. Gentoo >has done countless migrations like this and for whatever reason in the >past creating a tracker and blocker bugs hasn't been a problem. > Nothing is really hard about masking packages for removal... honestly. The work comes in defending the position here for the few that complain. If I filed a bug... they would complain or not respond... If I sent out a dev-announce they would complain or not respond. You see the fun here? Which method is effective? Mask a 100 packages for removal... Someone complains... A few packages get saved and 90 get removed... Life goes on. -Aaron -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 11:07 PM Aaron Bauman wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 04:21:14PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > > > > We're removing python2 around . You can help us out by updating > > any packages you have that use python2. If you want to easily > > identify these packages just do . > > > > I think the problem here is that we're basically telling maintainers > > that the beatings will continue until morale improves. Then we're > > wondering why nothing is getting done. > > > > I am thoroughly confused here. Some how you have completely changed your > opinion from previous posts. Perhaps we failed to communicate then. My opinion has always been this: I support letting the python team manage the versions of python available - if people want legacy versions to stick around they need to do something to make it happen. HOWEVER, the python team would also find its job much easier if they partnered with the myriad of package maintainers to accomplish their goals, instead of just throwing them over the fence and then breaking things for users to try to get everybody's attention periodically. > > Of all the methods listed in the previous posts, the QA reports, etc. > there is no excuse individuals can't find out if their package is py2 > only. None of those methods were posted until a day or two ago, and the python team has done nothing to actually ensure all the impacted maintainers are aware of them. Perhaps a communication to -dev-announce with the preferred approach would be better? You can't expect every Gentoo dev to independently cobble together a bunch of scripts to go hunting for py2 reverse deps. > Ironically, it would be a very sad state if an individual doesn't know > what Python interpreter their package is compatible with. This is the > essence of "maintainer" status, correct? Maintainers generally care about what the package does, and how it does it is a means to an end. Sure, some care more about the build system and dependencies than others, and when working on a package you need to pay more attention to such things. However, I suspect most package maintainers do not know off the top of their head the dependency list of all their packages. > Obviously, the myriad of tools, ML threads, and all the other "avenues" > individual developers have taken to alert others simply doesn't work... > until something is p.masked... people don't budge. At least some devs here seemed surprised about the masks. Did you try filing a bug? Masking something for all users is basically like torturing a kitten to get the attention of its owner. It is a necessary step if the package is actually to be removed. I don't think it is even allowable under our policies if no bug was filed. But if filing bugs is painful at least make things easier on maintainers. Post a list of packages and owners, for example. It just seems like you're making things harder on yourself. Gentoo has done countless migrations like this and for whatever reason in the past creating a tracker and blocker bugs hasn't been a problem. I don't think the community will be served by having the python team work itself into a frenzy until they ragequit. Just give in, send out a -announce post, and maybe cut your workload in half at least. I get that you seem to want to stand on some kind of principle that everybody in Gentoo should care about the py2 migration as much as you do, but it probably isn't going to happen. Help everybody else help you... -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On June 26, 2020 2:45:07 AM EDT, Mart Raudsepp wrote: >Ühel kenal päeval, N, 25.06.2020 kell 23:47, kirjutas Aaron Bauman: >> Yes, there are successors in Gentoo. > >Traditionally p.mask entries point these out. Feel free to find and report all possible alternatives for all the packages that must go or be ported to remove Py2. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
Ühel kenal päeval, N, 25.06.2020 kell 23:47, kirjutas Aaron Bauman: > Yes, there are successors in Gentoo. Traditionally p.mask entries point these out. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 8:14 PM Aaron Bauman wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:12:18AM -0700, Matt Turner wrote: > > offlineimap is widely used and blocks no further work. It can easily > > remain in the tree after all other python2_7 support is gone. > > > > This is not a hill worth dying on. > > > > I am confused here... are you saying that due to usage of the package > that it should stay until dev-lang/python:2 is gone? > > More importantly, I simply responded to Thomas' mention that the package > has alternatives, but apparently, I don't understand how the package is > used :) Two reasons: because it's widely used *and* because its python:2.7 dependency is on only the interpreter itself. The second reason means that its removal doesn't enable any further clean ups.
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:52:28AM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > On 2020-06-20 21:24, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > Thomas, unfortunately, I am shocked at your choice of words here. I > > think it is reasonable that any developer would understand a lack > > of forward momentum in removing Py2 only packages only drives > > stagnation. > > > > If you have a more effective method to doing so, I am open to > > suggestions. > > Like I am shocked about your recent actions: > > Remember what you did in January. I thought it became clear that next > time you will share your list before just masking stuff to avoid things > which happened then. > Developers have many tools and *hopefully* the organic ability to determine which packages are impacted. Especially given previous threads on this very ML with pleas from other Python team members to assist in cleaning things up in a deliberate manner. This is why the QA team interceded... because a couple of individuals screamed loudly for no reason. Fix it and move on. > In the beginning of this month you just decided to disband graphics > project. On your own. Please tell me what gave you the authority to just > do that? You didn't even share your plan before executing it on any > mailing list. Something that should be common sense, if not even necessary. > The whole action was so destructive that you couldn't evenb just undo it > because you also deleted stuff on Wiki. > I will not apologize for doing something that others have lacked the intestinal fortitude to do. > Like multiple people have already shown you, many packages from that > list are not even blocking Py3 transition. > This isn't about transitioning to Py3... it is about removing Py2. > Let me tell you what a mask will cause: > A mask is destructive and requires user interaction. Therefore a mask > isn't something to play with, "Oh, let's test if someone will > complain... it's just a mask, we can just unmask in case...". > Is that why you assume I masked these things? > No, imagine there are people out there using Gentoo in production and > not as playground. These people maybe have automated build systems which > are creating systems/images (do you know Dockers for example?). Whenever > you mask something and that package is referenced in configuration, you > will break that build. > > That's not funny if this is happening for no real reason. > I know you use Gentoo in production, but does this mean we (Gentoo) can't move forward because *you* want to use something that is EOL and dying? What if you used a major distro that removed Py2 support already? Why complain here? There are other ways to safely run your tooling with Py2 if you so choose. > > > re: net-mail/offlineimap... there are alternatives. > > I think you don't really know that tool. It's an industry standard. > Sure, there are already successors (however, not in Gentoo). But the > package itself is still working and actively maintained and when you > will use it in production you usually have extended/adjusted the tool > for your environment using the plugin system the tool provides. That's > not something you will be able to replace with something new in 5 minutes. > You continuously speak condescendingly to me. I am truly starting to regret my nomination for you on both the security project and for council. Do you speak to others this way simply because you don't agree with them? Yes, I use net-mail/offlineimap... I know how it works. No, I really hope that a tool which has not been maintained in many years is an "industry standard" Yes, there are successors in Gentoo. > And I repeat myself: Especially not when there is no need to do that > because because the package itself is working fine and there is absolute > no reason to get rid of it. > Take Patrick's approach and move it to an overlay if you want it that badly. > Last but not least: Gentoo is about choices. It's not your job to decide > what people should use. Sure, if you maintained a package and will stop > using it so it will become maintainer-needed and masked for removal at > some point because it's outdated, vulnerable and/or not working anymore, > that's OK. But if someone else will pick up this package... and > offlineimap in Gentoo is working and up-to-date. > Are you implying that because "Gentoo is about choice" that we never remove an ebuild, interpreter, compiler, etc? Let ::gentoo grow in size forever to appease the few? -- Cheers, Aaron signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:12:18AM -0700, Matt Turner wrote: > offlineimap is widely used and blocks no further work. It can easily > remain in the tree after all other python2_7 support is gone. > > This is not a hill worth dying on. > I am confused here... are you saying that due to usage of the package that it should stay until dev-lang/python:2 is gone? More importantly, I simply responded to Thomas' mention that the package has alternatives, but apparently, I don't understand how the package is used :) -- Cheers, Aaron signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 04:21:14PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 4:08 PM Michał Górny wrote: > > > > $ git grep -l mgo...@gentoo.org '**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2 | > > xargs gpy-py2 2>/dev/null > > > > I have no idea what gpy-py2 is, but I'll take your word for it. > > In any case, the solution in this case is to send a nice email to > -dev-announce saying: > > We're removing python2 around . You can help us out by updating > any packages you have that use python2. If you want to easily > identify these packages just do . > > I think the problem here is that we're basically telling maintainers > that the beatings will continue until morale improves. Then we're > wondering why nothing is getting done. > > I'm not saying anybody has to do it a particular way - it just seems > obvious that the way we're doing it is more successful at getting > people upset than actually getting results. > > Ideally you would just open a tracker bug and then per-package bugs > for every impacted package. That would be the cleanest solution. If > that is too painful then by all means do some email announcements, but > make it easy for devs to realize when they're missing something. > > Having a package mask be the first time a maintainer finds out that > they have a problem isn't good. Now, you can blame that on the > maintainer, or you can blame that on the python team, but either way > the users end up getting exposed to breakage unnecessarily. > > -- > Rich > I am thoroughly confused here. Some how you have completely changed your opinion from previous posts. Furthermore, this has turned into a debate of how to find packages that are Py2 only which is just absurd. Of all the methods listed in the previous posts, the QA reports, etc. there is no excuse individuals can't find out if their package is py2 only. Ironically, it would be a very sad state if an individual doesn't know what Python interpreter their package is compatible with. This is the essence of "maintainer" status, correct? Can we stop finding excuses and let folks fix their packages? Obviously, the myriad of tools, ML threads, and all the other "avenues" individual developers have taken to alert others simply doesn't work... until something is p.masked... people don't budge. -- Cheers, Aaron signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 2:45 PM John Helmert III wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 07:32:04AM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > On 2020-06-24 16:08, Michał Górny wrote:
> > >
> > > $ git grep -l mgo...@gentoo.org '**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2 |
> > > xargs gpy-py2 2>/dev/null
> > find -L "${REPO}" \
> maint=$(pquery ${pkg} --one-attr maintainers | tail -1)
Great, so now we have 4 ways (and counting) to get 4 answers to this
question that hopefully will be mostly the same.
My point is more that it makes more sense for one person to just file
the bugs or send out the list so that maintainers can go fix their
packages, as opposed to playing a game where every developer in Gentoo
independently engineers a solution to the same problem. If some
maintainers decide not to play the game, or play it and make a
mistake, then it ends up being the python team or the users who lose.
If a maintainer ignores a blocker bug for too long nobody is going to
shed a tear over some treecleaning. Spending a bit more time on
communication might save a lot more time in cleanup.
--
Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 07:32:04AM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 2020-06-24 16:08, Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > $ git grep -l mgo...@gentoo.org '**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2 |
> > xargs gpy-py2 2>/dev/null
> >
>
> The big problem with this is that it misses any aliases (like graphics@)
> that you're a member of. But let's golf; this is POSIX sh, doesn't use
> grep to parse XML, and takes the maintainer's email address as an argument:
>
> REPO=/var/db/repos/gentoo
> XPATH="/pkgmetadata/maintainer/email[normalize-space(text()) = '${1}']"
>
> find -L "${REPO}" \
> -mindepth 3 \
> -maxdepth 3 \
> -name 'metadata.xml' \
> -exec sh -c "
> for f in \"\${@}\"; do
> xmllint --xpath \"${XPATH}\" \"\${f}\" >/dev/null 2>&1 && \
> echo \"\$(dirname -- \"\${f}\")\" | sed \"s:${REPO%/}/::\"
> done
> " - {} +
>
We can instead avoid parsing XML at all if we're not averse to using
`pquery`, and we can avoid the limitation of scanning the entire tree
for a single name/email by outputting the maintainers for all of the
problematic packages at once (in this case, packages output by
`gpy-py2`) in a greppable format. Not sure why pquery doesn't see
maintainers for things like automake:1.9, so this implementation is
imperfect, but here:
REPO=/var/db/repos/gentoo
for pkg in $(gpy-py2 -r "${REPO}"); do
maint=$(pquery ${pkg} --one-attr maintainers | tail -1)
if [[ ${maint} ]]; then
echo "${pkg}: ${maint}"
else
echo "${pkg}: maintainer-needed"
fi
done
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On 2020-06-24 16:08, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> $ git grep -l mgo...@gentoo.org '**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2 |
> xargs gpy-py2 2>/dev/null
>
The big problem with this is that it misses any aliases (like graphics@)
that you're a member of. But let's golf; this is POSIX sh, doesn't use
grep to parse XML, and takes the maintainer's email address as an argument:
REPO=/var/db/repos/gentoo
XPATH="/pkgmetadata/maintainer/email[normalize-space(text()) = '${1}']"
find -L "${REPO}" \
-mindepth 3 \
-maxdepth 3 \
-name 'metadata.xml' \
-exec sh -c "
for f in \"\${@}\"; do
xmllint --xpath \"${XPATH}\" \"\${f}\" >/dev/null 2>&1 && \
echo \"\$(dirname -- \"\${f}\")\" | sed \"s:${REPO%/}/::\"
done
" - {} +
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 4:08 PM Michał Górny wrote: > > $ git grep -l mgo...@gentoo.org '**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2 | > xargs gpy-py2 2>/dev/null > I have no idea what gpy-py2 is, but I'll take your word for it. In any case, the solution in this case is to send a nice email to -dev-announce saying: We're removing python2 around . You can help us out by updating any packages you have that use python2. If you want to easily identify these packages just do . I think the problem here is that we're basically telling maintainers that the beatings will continue until morale improves. Then we're wondering why nothing is getting done. I'm not saying anybody has to do it a particular way - it just seems obvious that the way we're doing it is more successful at getting people upset than actually getting results. Ideally you would just open a tracker bug and then per-package bugs for every impacted package. That would be the cleanest solution. If that is too painful then by all means do some email announcements, but make it easy for devs to realize when they're missing something. Having a package mask be the first time a maintainer finds out that they have a problem isn't good. Now, you can blame that on the maintainer, or you can blame that on the python team, but either way the users end up getting exposed to breakage unnecessarily. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, 2020-06-24 at 16:03 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 3:04 PM Andreas Sturmlechner > wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:29 AM Rich Freeman wrote: > > > > Sure, you can use the portage API to find this info. However, that is > > > > as easy to do for a list of all impacted packages in the tree with > > > > their maintainers as for any individual maintainer to obtain this info > > > > for their own packages. > > > > I'm appealing to a more proactive maintenance, not in search for excuses why > > it is not like that. And ftr I don't mean trying to be "first!" on every > > upstream version bump; it is just that the python topic has come up often > > enough that it should have sparked individual head scratching at one point > > or > > another. > > > > > On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 20:40:58 CEST Alec Warner wrote: > > > You say there is not a straightforward way, but then you say there is an > > > api? :p > > > > grep all the things! But hey, there's even external tools to help you get an > > overview: > > > > https://repology.org/maintainer/rich0%40gentoo.org > > > > You're welcome. > > I'm well aware of that. That will get you a list of what you > maintain, but not which of those things use python2. It is also > completely external. (I do love that tool though - great for finding > bumps.) > > grep is really not a reliable tool for parsing ebuilds. The API is > really the right way to do it. > $ git grep -l mgo...@gentoo.org '**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2 | xargs gpy-py2 2>/dev/null -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 3:04 PM Andreas Sturmlechner wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:29 AM Rich Freeman wrote: > > > Sure, you can use the portage API to find this info. However, that is > > > as easy to do for a list of all impacted packages in the tree with > > > their maintainers as for any individual maintainer to obtain this info > > > for their own packages. > > I'm appealing to a more proactive maintenance, not in search for excuses why > it is not like that. And ftr I don't mean trying to be "first!" on every > upstream version bump; it is just that the python topic has come up often > enough that it should have sparked individual head scratching at one point or > another. > > > On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 20:40:58 CEST Alec Warner wrote: > > You say there is not a straightforward way, but then you say there is an > > api? :p > > grep all the things! But hey, there's even external tools to help you get an > overview: > > https://repology.org/maintainer/rich0%40gentoo.org > > You're welcome. I'm well aware of that. That will get you a list of what you maintain, but not which of those things use python2. It is also completely external. (I do love that tool though - great for finding bumps.) grep is really not a reliable tool for parsing ebuilds. The API is really the right way to do it. What I was getting at though is that just posting a big list up-front will probably get more results than just telling everybody to try to figure out if they're impacted. (Also, I noticed that the list I sent out earlier contained some overlay-only packages - probably best to re-run it on a clean repository. Since it uses the API it sees everything portage sees, including overlays.) -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:29 AM Rich Freeman wrote: > > Sure, you can use the portage API to find this info. However, that is > > as easy to do for a list of all impacted packages in the tree with > > their maintainers as for any individual maintainer to obtain this info > > for their own packages. I'm appealing to a more proactive maintenance, not in search for excuses why it is not like that. And ftr I don't mean trying to be "first!" on every upstream version bump; it is just that the python topic has come up often enough that it should have sparked individual head scratching at one point or another. > On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 20:40:58 CEST Alec Warner wrote: > You say there is not a straightforward way, but then you say there is an > api? :p grep all the things! But hey, there's even external tools to help you get an overview: https://repology.org/maintainer/rich0%40gentoo.org You're welcome. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 2:40 PM Alec Warner wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:29 AM Rich Freeman wrote: >> >> Sure, you can use the portage API to find this info. However, that is >> as easy to do for a list of all impacted packages in the tree with >> their maintainers as for any individual maintainer to obtain this info >> for their own packages. > > > You say there is not a straightforward way, but then you say there is an api? > :p > Yeah - the number of people around here who have used it is pretty small. My point though is that if you've done that work it is easiest to just do it once for everybody. > Extend the existing QA report? > > https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/py2.txt > > There is a list of py2 only packages. We just need to add the maintainer > metadata? Exactly. I decided to get off my rear end and try to contribute a bit. See the attachments. Script adapted from my ancient (ironically v2-only) script to find missing slot op deps. Contents are meant to inform, and not to shame (mostly)... -- Rich app-accessibility/SphinxTrain-1.0.8 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - accessibil...@gentoo.org, so...@gentoo.org app-accessibility/sphinx3-0.8-r1 - python_targets_python2_7 - accessibil...@gentoo.org app-accessibility/sphinxbase-0.8 - python_targets_python2_7 - accessibil...@gentoo.org app-admin/conkyforecast-2.24-r1 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - app-admin/denyhosts-2.9 - python_targets_python2_7 - proxy-ma...@gentoo.org app-admin/denyhosts-3.0 - python_targets_python2_7 - proxy-ma...@gentoo.org app-admin/syslog-summary-1.14-r1 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - lmip...@gmail.com, proxy-ma...@gentoo.org app-admin/syslog-summary-1.14-r2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - lmip...@gmail.com, proxy-ma...@gentoo.org app-admin/syslog-summary-1.14-r3 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - lmip...@gmail.com, proxy-ma...@gentoo.org app-antivirus/clamtk-6.03 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - conik...@gentoo.org app-arch/cfv-1.18.3-r1 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - app-arch/deltarpm-3.6 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - app-arch/ipkg-utils-1.7.050831-r3 - python_targets_python2_7 - jnr...@gmail.com, proxy-ma...@gentoo.org app-backup/bareos-17.2.9 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - msch...@gentoo.org app-backup/bareos-18.2.8 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - msch...@gentoo.org app-backup/genbackupdata-1.9 - python_targets_python2_7 - robb...@gentoo.org app-backup/holland-1.0.10 - python_targets_python2_7 - app-backup/holland-backup-example-1.0.10 - python_targets_python2_7 - app-backup/holland-backup-pgdump-1.0.10 - python_targets_python2_7 - app-backup/holland-backup-random-1.0.10 - python_targets_python2_7 - app-backup/holland-backup-sqlite-1.0.10 - python_targets_python2_7 - app-backup/holland-lib-common-1.0.10 - python_targets_python2_7 - app-backup/holland-lib-lvm-1.0.10 - python_targets_python2_7 - app-cdr/burn-cd-1.8.0-r1 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - canutethegr...@gmail.com, proxy-ma...@gentoo.org app-cdr/burn-cd-1.8.1 - python_targets_python2_7 - canutethegr...@gmail.com, proxy-ma...@gentoo.org app-cdr/cdcover-0.7.4-r1 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - app-crypt/openssl-blacklist-0.5.3 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - ha...@gentoo.org app-crypt/openvpn-blacklist-0.4-r1 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - ha...@gentoo.org app-crypt/openvpn-blacklist-0.5 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - ha...@gentoo.org app-crypt/pius-2.2.4 - python_targets_python2_7 - nickaristocra...@gmail.com, proxy-ma...@gentoo.org app-crypt/ssh-multiadd-1.3.2-r1 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - k...@gentoo.org app-crypt/virtualsmartcard-0.7 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - mgo...@gentoo.org app-dicts/opendict-0.6.7-r1 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - wxwidg...@gentoo.org app-editors/bluefish-2.2.10 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - app-editors/editra-0.7.20-r2 - python_targets_python2_7 - wxwidg...@gentoo.org app-editors/leo-5.6 - python_targets_python2_7 - app-editors/pluma-1.22.2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - m...@gentoo.org app-emacs/pymacs-0.26-r1 - python_targets_python2_7 - gnu-em...@gentoo.org, pyt...@gentoo.org app-emulation/crossover-bin-12.5.0-r2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - r...@gentoo.org app-emulation/crossover-bin-12.5.1-r2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - r...@gentoo.org app-emulation/crossover-bin-13.0.0-r2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - r...@gentoo.org app-emulation/crossover-bin-13.0.1-r2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - r...@gentoo.org app-emulation/crossover-bin-13.1.0-r2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - r...@gentoo.org app-emulation/crossover-bin-13.1.2-r2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - r...@gentoo.org app-emulation/crossover-bin-13.1.3-r2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - r...@gentoo.org app-emulation/crossover-bin-13.2.0-r2 - +python_single_target_python2_7 - r...@gentoo.org app-emulation/crossover-bin-14.0.3-r1 - +python_single_target_python2_7 -
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:29 AM Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 2:18 PM Andreas Sturmlechner > wrote: > > > > The lack of curiosity for one's own packages' python compatibility is > not just > > a py27 isolated issue, it was a big problem with py36 -> py37 with so > many > > devs simply not filing that necessary stabilisation. > > That suggests that if you keep doing what you're doing, you're going > to keep hitting your head against the wall. > > Right now in Gentoo there isn't really even a straightforward way for > a maintainer to cleanly obtain a list of all the packages they > maintain, let alone whether they use python v2. > > Sure, you can use the portage API to find this info. However, that is > as easy to do for a list of all impacted packages in the tree with > their maintainers as for any individual maintainer to obtain this info > for their own packages. > You say there is not a straightforward way, but then you say there is an api? :p > > I think that if you give the maintainers a bit more info, you'll find > them being more proactive about helping you out. Basically you would > be helping them help you. > > Otherwise you're going to mask a bunch of packages and run into a > bunch of upset devs, and as a byproduct we create a bunch of upset > users. > Extend the existing QA report? https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/py2.txt There is a list of py2 only packages. We just need to add the maintainer metadata? > > There is no reason to mask a package only to unmask it a few days > later. Masks are a mechanism for deprecating packages so that users > take action. They're not a substitute for devs talking to each other. > > -- > Rich > >
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 2:18 PM Andreas Sturmlechner wrote: > > The lack of curiosity for one's own packages' python compatibility is not just > a py27 isolated issue, it was a big problem with py36 -> py37 with so many > devs simply not filing that necessary stabilisation. That suggests that if you keep doing what you're doing, you're going to keep hitting your head against the wall. Right now in Gentoo there isn't really even a straightforward way for a maintainer to cleanly obtain a list of all the packages they maintain, let alone whether they use python v2. Sure, you can use the portage API to find this info. However, that is as easy to do for a list of all impacted packages in the tree with their maintainers as for any individual maintainer to obtain this info for their own packages. I think that if you give the maintainers a bit more info, you'll find them being more proactive about helping you out. Basically you would be helping them help you. Otherwise you're going to mask a bunch of packages and run into a bunch of upset devs, and as a byproduct we create a bunch of upset users. There is no reason to mask a package only to unmask it a few days later. Masks are a mechanism for deprecating packages so that users take action. They're not a substitute for devs talking to each other. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 20:03:57 CEST Michał Górny wrote: > I think you're making the wrong assumption that Gentoo developers run > bleeding edge systems. Instead, many of them prefer running stable > and avoiding anything even remotely problematic. That's not a contradiction for stable systems where I am using py38 as default today already, and if it leads to more stable requests (without me ending up having to do it) then even better. The lack of curiosity for one's own packages' python compatibility is not just a py27 isolated issue, it was a big problem with py36 -> py37 with so many devs simply not filing that necessary stabilisation. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, 2020-06-24 at 19:48 +0200, Andreas Sturmlechner wrote: > On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 13:19:08 CEST Rich Freeman wrote: > > You seem to think that maintainers should know if they're maintaining > > a v2-only package. I suspect that most maintainers don't pay that > > close attention to what versions of python are supported by their > > various packages, and neither do most users. > > I would expect exactly that of maintainers. By now, there has been py27-EOL > mail on this list aplenty for everyone to get the message. > > Instead, every single maintainer should already have removed py27 from > defaults and be actively cutting down the resulting package.use list of those > packages they maintain and if necessary also their dependencies. I think you're making the wrong assumption that Gentoo developers run bleeding edge systems. Instead, many of them prefer running stable and avoiding anything even remotely problematic. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 13:19:08 CEST Rich Freeman wrote: > You seem to think that maintainers should know if they're maintaining > a v2-only package. I suspect that most maintainers don't pay that > close attention to what versions of python are supported by their > various packages, and neither do most users. I would expect exactly that of maintainers. By now, there has been py27-EOL mail on this list aplenty for everyone to get the message. Instead, every single maintainer should already have removed py27 from defaults and be actively cutting down the resulting package.use list of those packages they maintain and if necessary also their dependencies. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 2:52 AM Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > On 2020-06-20 21:24, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > Thomas, unfortunately, I am shocked at your choice of words here. I > > think it is reasonable that any developer would understand a lack > > of forward momentum in removing Py2 only packages only drives > > stagnation. > > > > If you have a more effective method to doing so, I am open to > > suggestions. > > Like I am shocked about your recent actions: I'm shocked that you're shocked that he's shocked! Let's stop the theatrics.
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:24 PM Aaron Bauman wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 01:29:46PM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > > On 2020-06-20 12:07, Michał Górny wrote: > > >> Al least, python2 is not on your list. > > >> > > >> Be first into the future by masking this stuff and > > >> Last out of the past by leaving up to users to decide. > > >> It could stay in the tree, masked, as long as python2. > > >> > > > > > > Do you really think it'd be better to last rite a 1000 packages > > > simultaneously? > > > > What's the purpose of this at all? > > > > dev-lang/python:2.7 won't go away that soon. > > > > Removing perfectly working and up-to-date software which is in > > maintenance-only mode like net-mail/offlineimap is just not user-friendly. > > > > It doesn't even has deps on other Python packages blocking your cleanup > > delusion. > > > > Thomas, unfortunately, I am shocked at your choice of words here. I > think it is reasonable that any developer would understand a lack > of forward momentum in removing Py2 only packages only drives > stagnation. > > If you have a more effective method to doing so, I am open to > suggestions. Between the disagreements about whether a package should be masked, the length of time the last rites period should be, and the steps required to disband a project, I think there's been enough pushback that it's necessary to change how you approach these projects. Please start by using the standard 30-day last rites period. It's a simple thing and whether the packages are in tree for an additional 16 days should not affect any of your work. > re: net-mail/offlineimap... there are alternatives. Removing python2_7 support from the tree is a valuable goal, but offlineimap is widely used and blocks no further work. It can easily remain in the tree after all other python2_7 support is gone. This is not a hill worth dying on.
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Wed, 2020-06-24 at 11:52 +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > In the beginning of this month you just decided to disband graphics > project. On your own. Please tell me what gave you the authority to just > do that? You didn't even share your plan before executing it on any > mailing list. Something that should be common sense, if not even necessary. Surely, that could have been done better (and I don't like that bman didn't contact me) but the repeated claims that it came out of nowhere are plain bs. The bug for discussing what to do [1] was open for a year and 3 months. The only person replying on the bug was maekke, and I think I've talked with some other member on IRC but don't recall whom exactly. Now, I'm sorry if you feel like people didn't ask for your opinion. However, if you really cared about graphics project then you should've either joined the team or at least monitored the alias, and replied to the bug. Attacking people because they executed the action nobody objected to is not nice. Again, I would like to remind you the golden rule: if you want something to be the way you want it to be, do the work or convince somebody to do it. Making unjustified demands of others, ignoring problems and then complaining is not helping anyone. This applies to everyone, regular developers and Council members alike. [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/681938 > > The whole action was so destructive that you couldn't evenb just undo it > because you also deleted stuff on Wiki. He's not the first and not the last person to use wiki wrong. I'd argue the problem is that MW is retarded and it's easy to get it wrong. However, instead of using this as an excuse to strengthen your attack you could've just pinged wiki admins to restore the page (hey, we don't monitor everything that happens on the wiki!). This is done now, enjoy. > A mask is destructive and requires user interaction. Therefore a mask > isn't something to play with, "Oh, let's test if someone will > complain... it's just a mask, we can just unmask in case...". Didn't you just argue against using any information to drive decisions on package removal? Then indeed masks are the only tool we have. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 1:36 PM Aaron Bauman wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 10:32:28AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > On Sat, 20 Jun 2020, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > > > >> # Aaron Bauman (2020-06-20) > > >> # Py2 only > > >> # Removal in 14 days > > > > I see these short deadlines quite often recently. Any reason why this > > can't be the usual 30 days? > > > > Hi, Ulrich. Yes, the deadlines are meant to speed up the process as we > have *roughly* 1000+ pkgs which must be converted to py3 or removed > before we can drop the interpreter. > Wouldn't it make more sense to just file bugs on ALL the impacted packages, wait a few weeks, and then makes ALL of them at once, with the regular 30d deadline? Or if filing bugs is administratively difficult then just post a list with packages and maintainers on -dev - this has been done for changes in the past. Right now it seems like some maintainers are finding out that their packages are impacted for the first time by having their packages masked. That means that end-users get a package mask notice and start taking action. Then a few days later the package is unmasked. Of course, by then half the users have probably started migrating to other packages - perhaps ones that are less suitable for them. You seem to think that maintainers should know if they're maintaining a v2-only package. I suspect that most maintainers don't pay that close attention to what versions of python are supported by their various packages, and neither do most users. If it runs then it runs, and most don't care which interpreter is being used. I get that it impacts the python team but we need to make these issues more visible to maintainers. Maintainers often have an assortment of packages, and probably don't realize when any particular one has a particular python compatibility issue. If it is difficult for you to identify all the impacted packages, why would it be any easier for a maintainer who has probably spent less time than you hunting down v2-only packages? It seems like we really need a better solution here. And just masking a package without filing any bug beforehand doesn't really seem in-line with policy. We don't even do that for serious security vulnerabilities. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On 2020-06-20 21:24, Aaron Bauman wrote: > Thomas, unfortunately, I am shocked at your choice of words here. I > think it is reasonable that any developer would understand a lack > of forward momentum in removing Py2 only packages only drives > stagnation. > > If you have a more effective method to doing so, I am open to > suggestions. Like I am shocked about your recent actions: Remember what you did in January. I thought it became clear that next time you will share your list before just masking stuff to avoid things which happened then. In the beginning of this month you just decided to disband graphics project. On your own. Please tell me what gave you the authority to just do that? You didn't even share your plan before executing it on any mailing list. Something that should be common sense, if not even necessary. The whole action was so destructive that you couldn't evenb just undo it because you also deleted stuff on Wiki. And now you did it again with Py2-only packages. And again for no good reason. Like multiple people have already shown you, many packages from that list are not even blocking Py3 transition. Let me tell you what a mask will cause: A mask is destructive and requires user interaction. Therefore a mask isn't something to play with, "Oh, let's test if someone will complain... it's just a mask, we can just unmask in case...". No, imagine there are people out there using Gentoo in production and not as playground. These people maybe have automated build systems which are creating systems/images (do you know Dockers for example?). Whenever you mask something and that package is referenced in configuration, you will break that build. That's not funny if this is happening for no real reason. > re: net-mail/offlineimap... there are alternatives. I think you don't really know that tool. It's an industry standard. Sure, there are already successors (however, not in Gentoo). But the package itself is still working and actively maintained and when you will use it in production you usually have extended/adjusted the tool for your environment using the plugin system the tool provides. That's not something you will be able to replace with something new in 5 minutes. And I repeat myself: Especially not when there is no need to do that because because the package itself is working fine and there is absolute no reason to get rid of it. Last but not least: Gentoo is about choices. It's not your job to decide what people should use. Sure, if you maintained a package and will stop using it so it will become maintainer-needed and masked for removal at some point because it's outdated, vulnerable and/or not working anymore, that's OK. But if someone else will pick up this package... and offlineimap in Gentoo is working and up-to-date. Heck, we could even talk about how rude it is to force a maintainer to drop its package. And yes, even p-m should be treated like real devs. So you can't just kill their packages because you want to. -- Regards, Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer fpr: C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 01:29:46PM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > On 2020-06-20 12:07, Michał Górny wrote: > >> Al least, python2 is not on your list. > >> > >> Be first into the future by masking this stuff and > >> Last out of the past by leaving up to users to decide. > >> It could stay in the tree, masked, as long as python2. > >> > > > > Do you really think it'd be better to last rite a 1000 packages > > simultaneously? > > What's the purpose of this at all? > > dev-lang/python:2.7 won't go away that soon. > > Removing perfectly working and up-to-date software which is in > maintenance-only mode like net-mail/offlineimap is just not user-friendly. > > It doesn't even has deps on other Python packages blocking your cleanup > delusion. > Thomas, unfortunately, I am shocked at your choice of words here. I think it is reasonable that any developer would understand a lack of forward momentum in removing Py2 only packages only drives stagnation. If you have a more effective method to doing so, I am open to suggestions. re: net-mail/offlineimap... there are alternatives. -- Cheers, Aaron signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 10:32:28AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Sat, 20 Jun 2020, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > >> # Aaron Bauman (2020-06-20) > >> # Py2 only > >> # Removal in 14 days > > I see these short deadlines quite often recently. Any reason why this > can't be the usual 30 days? > > >> [...] > > >> games-board/scid > > I wonder about scid appearing in the list. IIRC, it is written in C++, > not Python. > > Ulrich Hi, Ulrich. Yes, the deadlines are meant to speed up the process as we have *roughly* 1000+ pkgs which must be converted to py3 or removed before we can drop the interpreter. As such, doing this in bulk with delays in between masks helps others find and fix up these packages if they can stay. Some have ports to Py3, others simply don't need the bindings, etc. So, thank you to all who have taken a few minutes to help us keep packages that can still be supported. Unfortunately, we have a bad ratio of devs to # of packages. -- Cheers, Aaron signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 14:58:22 +0300 Azamat Hackimov wrote: > > games-emulation/openmsx > > git version migrated to meson and python3 Yeah, don't worry, this has been on my TODO for a while and I'll step it up the list. I was hoping they'd do a release but no such luck. -- James Le Cuirot (chewi) Gentoo Linux Developer pgpuDKd84KFJF.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Sat, 2020-06-20 at 13:29 +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > On 2020-06-20 12:07, Michał Górny wrote: > > > Al least, python2 is not on your list. > > > > > > Be first into the future by masking this stuff and > > > Last out of the past by leaving up to users to decide. > > > It could stay in the tree, masked, as long as python2. > > > > > > > Do you really think it'd be better to last rite a 1000 packages > > simultaneously? > > What's the purpose of this at all? > > dev-lang/python:2.7 won't go away that soon. > Removing perfectly working and up-to-date software which is in > maintenance-only mode like net-mail/offlineimap is just not user-friendly. > > It doesn't even has deps on other Python packages blocking your cleanup > delusion. > Don't you think that accussing others publicly of being delusional is not appropriate? Just because someone doesn't agree with your vision is no reason to insult your fellow developers. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:58:20AM -0400, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > # Aaron Bauman (2020-06-20) > > # Py2 only > > # Removal in 14 days > > dev-util/uftrace This is a function tracer written in C. I don't know why it's on this list. If a package has only optional support for python like this, just drop python support rather than the whole package, please. In this case it's just a matter of adding --without-libpython to the call to econf. In any case, the release notes for the latest version says that it now does support python3, even though the configuration for python3 seems a bit broken after I've had a look at it. I will take it and fix nevertheless. Cheers, -Guilherme
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
> games-emulation/openmsx git version migrated to meson and python3
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On 2020-06-20 12:07, Michał Górny wrote: >> Al least, python2 is not on your list. >> >> Be first into the future by masking this stuff and >> Last out of the past by leaving up to users to decide. >> It could stay in the tree, masked, as long as python2. >> > > Do you really think it'd be better to last rite a 1000 packages > simultaneously? What's the purpose of this at all? dev-lang/python:2.7 won't go away that soon. Removing perfectly working and up-to-date software which is in maintenance-only mode like net-mail/offlineimap is just not user-friendly. It doesn't even has deps on other Python packages blocking your cleanup delusion. -- Regards, Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer fpr: C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On Sat, 2020-06-20 at 10:36 +0100, Roy Bamford wrote: > On 2020.06.20 05:58, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > > # Aaron Bauman (2020-06-20) > > > # Py2 only > > > # Removal in 14 days > > [list of stuff] > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Aaron > > > > Aaron, > > If everything that needs python2 is being removed, > why not python2 itself? > > Al least, python2 is not on your list. > > Be first into the future by masking this stuff and > Last out of the past by leaving up to users to decide. > It could stay in the tree, masked, as long as python2. > Do you really think it'd be better to last rite a 1000 packages simultaneously? -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
On 2020.06.20 05:58, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > # Aaron Bauman (2020-06-20) > > # Py2 only > > # Removal in 14 days [list of stuff] > > -- > Cheers, > Aaron > Aaron, If everything that needs python2 is being removed, why not python2 itself? Al least, python2 is not on your list. Be first into the future by masking this stuff and Last out of the past by leaving up to users to decide. It could stay in the tree, masked, as long as python2. -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of elections gentoo-ops forum-mods arm64 pgp9CIkLXPSD0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2020, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>> games-board/scid > I wonder about scid appearing in the list. IIRC, it is written in C++, > not Python. It turns out that the ebuild installs a small Python script, which isn't needed for normal functioning of the program. Bug 728876 now. Ulrich signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] */*: Mask Py2 only packages
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2020, Aaron Bauman wrote: >> # Aaron Bauman (2020-06-20) >> # Py2 only >> # Removal in 14 days I see these short deadlines quite often recently. Any reason why this can't be the usual 30 days? >> [...] >> games-board/scid I wonder about scid appearing in the list. IIRC, it is written in C++, not Python. Ulrich signature.asc Description: PGP signature
