Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 4:34 PM Marcel Telka wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 07:16:18PM +0200, s...@pandora.be wrote: > > > > Part of the problem is, I think, that there is no maintainer any longer, > as far as I know, for the mkdocs component in oi-userland. > > > > If someone knows how to build mkdocs with python 3 (which is perhaps > possible, I don't know, I have no experience with building python > components) then this would solve most of the problem, I think ... > > > > Thanks for your work on this, because as I confirmed, there are indeed > really issues with the mkdocs python2.7. > > > > Several people related to the oi-docs are aware that we have a Python > 2.7 problem, but we are unsure how to fix it, I think. > > > > For example in my Vagrantfile I have a comment about a missing 2.7 > 'futures' component: > > > > > https://github.com/OpenIndiana/vagrantfiles/blob/main/oi-docs/Vagrantfile > > > > # there used to be a futures package in the repo ... > > # library/python/futures seems to have a problem now > > pfexec pkg install -v \ > > git lynx links\ > > library/python/futures \ > > library/python/mkdocs \ > > developer/documentation-tool/mdl > > # as of 21/9/2021 futures IPS is missing so install by pip > > pfexec pip install futures > > > > Because such "pip install" actions print a clear warning by Python that > we are using an unsupported Python 2.7, it is clear that something must be > done. > > The futures python package was obsoleted in May 2021 in OpenIndiana. > The reason is, apparently, this - see https://pypi.org/project/futures/: > > It does not work on Python 3 due to Python 2 syntax being used in the > codebase. Python 3 users should not attempt to install it, since the > package is already included in the standard library. > Marcel is right, there were a few modules to ensure the transition from Python 2 to Python 3 such as this one and other backport.* packages. Migrating to Python 3 as default and obsoleting these transitional packages should be enough. > > > Regards. > > -- > +---+ > | Marcel Telka e-mail: mar...@telka.sk | > |homepage: http://telka.sk/ | > +---+ > > ___ > oi-dev mailing list > oi-...@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev > -- --- Praise the Caffeine embeddings ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 07:16:18PM +0200, s...@pandora.be wrote: > > Part of the problem is, I think, that there is no maintainer any longer, as > far as I know, for the mkdocs component in oi-userland. > > If someone knows how to build mkdocs with python 3 (which is perhaps > possible, I don't know, I have no experience with building python components) > then this would solve most of the problem, I think ... > > Thanks for your work on this, because as I confirmed, there are indeed really > issues with the mkdocs python2.7. > > Several people related to the oi-docs are aware that we have a Python 2.7 > problem, but we are unsure how to fix it, I think. > > For example in my Vagrantfile I have a comment about a missing 2.7 'futures' > component: > > https://github.com/OpenIndiana/vagrantfiles/blob/main/oi-docs/Vagrantfile > > # there used to be a futures package in the repo ... > # library/python/futures seems to have a problem now > pfexec pkg install -v \ > git lynx links\ > library/python/futures \ > library/python/mkdocs \ > developer/documentation-tool/mdl > # as of 21/9/2021 futures IPS is missing so install by pip > pfexec pip install futures > > Because such "pip install" actions print a clear warning by Python that we > are using an unsupported Python 2.7, it is clear that something must be done. The futures python package was obsoleted in May 2021 in OpenIndiana. The reason is, apparently, this - see https://pypi.org/project/futures/: It does not work on Python 3 due to Python 2 syntax being used in the codebase. Python 3 users should not attempt to install it, since the package is already included in the standard library. Regards. -- +---+ | Marcel Telka e-mail: mar...@telka.sk | |homepage: http://telka.sk/ | +---+ ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
I think that the idea is to keep using "mkdocs 1.0.4' for the moment due to some Theme issue. According to the website https://www.mkdocs.org/about/release-notes/ the current release is mkdocs 1.4.0 which is not tested/required for OpenIndiana documentation. However the good news is that the release-notes state that mkdocs 1.0 supported python 3.7 It states "Officially support Python 3.7." for release 1.0 The version that is required is the one from 2018 : https://www.mkdocs.org/about/release-notes/#version-104-2018-09-07 My understanding that this version is required could be wrong, but it is due to the discussion about Themes. Also there was a PR (pull request) that was rejected in the past from somebody who tried to update mkdocs to version 1.2.3. But I think that there is actually no reason to use Python 2.7 for mkdocs 1.0.4. In fact the requirement for the "futures" package may be due to the fact that it can run on python 2.7 but requires the help from "futures" to do so ? Regards David Stes - Op 30 sep 2022 om 20:29 schreef Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us: > On Fri, 30 Sep 2022, s...@pandora.be wrote: > >> For example in my Vagrantfile I have a comment about a missing 2.7 'futures' >> component: >> >> https://github.com/OpenIndiana/vagrantfiles/blob/main/oi-docs/Vagrantfile >> >> # there used to be a futures package in the repo ... >> # library/python/futures seems to have a problem now >>pfexec pkg install -v \ >> git lynx links\ >> library/python/futures \ >> library/python/mkdocs \ >> developer/documentation-tool/mdl >> # as of 21/9/2021 futures IPS is missing so install by pip >> pfexec pip install futures >> >> Because such "pip install" actions print a clear warning by Python that we >> are >> using an unsupported Python 2.7, it is clear that something must be done. > > The "futures" package is intended to allow Python 2.7 code to be > "soft" ported to Python 3. It is a bridge to Python 3. As such, it > is important for any Python code yet to be ported to Python 3, or > might execute with either version. > > Bob > -- > Bob Friesenhahn > bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ > GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ > Public Key, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/public-key.txt > > ___ > oi-dev mailing list > oi-...@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
On Fri, 30 Sep 2022, s...@pandora.be wrote: For example in my Vagrantfile I have a comment about a missing 2.7 'futures' component: https://github.com/OpenIndiana/vagrantfiles/blob/main/oi-docs/Vagrantfile # there used to be a futures package in the repo ... # library/python/futures seems to have a problem now pfexec pkg install -v \ git lynx links\ library/python/futures \ library/python/mkdocs \ developer/documentation-tool/mdl # as of 21/9/2021 futures IPS is missing so install by pip pfexec pip install futures Because such "pip install" actions print a clear warning by Python that we are using an unsupported Python 2.7, it is clear that something must be done. The "futures" package is intended to allow Python 2.7 code to be "soft" ported to Python 3. It is a bridge to Python 3. As such, it is important for any Python code yet to be ported to Python 3, or might execute with either version. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ Public Key, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/public-key.txt ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
Part of the problem is, I think, that there is no maintainer any longer, as far as I know, for the mkdocs component in oi-userland. If someone knows how to build mkdocs with python 3 (which is perhaps possible, I don't know, I have no experience with building python components) then this would solve most of the problem, I think ... Thanks for your work on this, because as I confirmed, there are indeed really issues with the mkdocs python2.7. Several people related to the oi-docs are aware that we have a Python 2.7 problem, but we are unsure how to fix it, I think. For example in my Vagrantfile I have a comment about a missing 2.7 'futures' component: https://github.com/OpenIndiana/vagrantfiles/blob/main/oi-docs/Vagrantfile # there used to be a futures package in the repo ... # library/python/futures seems to have a problem now pfexec pkg install -v \ git lynx links\ library/python/futures \ library/python/mkdocs \ developer/documentation-tool/mdl # as of 21/9/2021 futures IPS is missing so install by pip pfexec pip install futures Because such "pip install" actions print a clear warning by Python that we are using an unsupported Python 2.7, it is clear that something must be done. Such as the work on Python 3.9 now, which is now in OpenIndiana the default thanks to the latest work ... David Stes ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
I sometimes submit documentation updates but I don't know the exact background or history of mkdocs on OpenIndiana. See for the discussion on "what should happen with mkdocs": https://github.com/OpenIndiana/oi-docs/issues/226 There were several contributors who are in favor of using "pip install mkdocs", instead of 'pkg install mkdocs' so that obsoleting 'mkdocs' is not a bad solution. If the IPS package is added again, then I think based on the issue 226 it should remain mkdocs 1.0.4: "So I think it is possible to stay / stick with mkdocs 1.0.4 and simply adapt / rebuild for a newer python version." That is, there are apparently issues with upgrading mkdocs to a newer version at the documentation "Theme" level. Regards, David Stes - Op 30 sep 2022 om 10:00 schreef Marcel Telka mar...@telka.sk: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 06:46:40PM +0200, s...@pandora.be wrote: >> >> > Based on the rule above we already obsoleted following packages >> > recently: >> > >> ... >> > library/python/mkdocs >> ... >> >> see http://docs.openindiana.org/contrib/getting-started/ >> >> that page says for installing mkdocs: >> >> "For OpenIndiana Hipster, MKDocs and all of it's dependencies have been >> packaged >> and are available in the OI Hipster repository. So, if you're already running >> Hipster, installing MKDocs is as simple as: pkg install mkdocs" > > Okay, I'll add mkdocs back. > > -- > +---+ >| Marcel Telka e-mail: mar...@telka.sk | >|homepage: http://telka.sk/ | > +---+ > > ___ > oi-dev mailing list > oi-...@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 06:46:40PM +0200, s...@pandora.be wrote: > > > Based on the rule above we already obsoleted following packages > > recently: > > > ... > > library/python/mkdocs > ... > > see http://docs.openindiana.org/contrib/getting-started/ > > that page says for installing mkdocs: > > "For OpenIndiana Hipster, MKDocs and all of it's dependencies have been > packaged and are available in the OI Hipster repository. So, if you're > already running Hipster, installing MKDocs is as simple as: pkg install > mkdocs" Okay, I'll add mkdocs back. -- +---+ | Marcel Telka e-mail: mar...@telka.sk | |homepage: http://telka.sk/ | +---+ ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
For the specific case of library/python/mkdocs which is now obsolete, changing/updating the docs.openindiana.org is a solution. The webpage for documenation specifically says that most operating systems use: "pip install mkdocs" So by removing the documentation on "pkg install mkdocs" this can be solved. - Op 29 sep 2022 om 18:46 schreef stes s...@telenet.be: >> Based on the rule above we already obsoleted following packages >> recently: >> > ... >> library/python/mkdocs > ... > > see http://docs.openindiana.org/contrib/getting-started/ > > that page says for installing mkdocs: > > "For OpenIndiana Hipster, MKDocs and all of it's dependencies have been > packaged > and are available in the OI Hipster repository. So, if you're already running > Hipster, installing MKDocs is as simple as: pkg install mkdocs" > > > also my vagrant image for oi-docs is using the IPS mkdocs package: > > https://github.com/OpenIndiana/vagrantfiles > > I can confirm that there's problems with the mkdocs IPS package as it is based > on the old 2.7 Python. > > David Stes > > ___ > oi-dev mailing list > oi-...@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
> Based on the rule above we already obsoleted following packages > recently: > ... > library/python/mkdocs ... see http://docs.openindiana.org/contrib/getting-started/ that page says for installing mkdocs: "For OpenIndiana Hipster, MKDocs and all of it's dependencies have been packaged and are available in the OI Hipster repository. So, if you're already running Hipster, installing MKDocs is as simple as: pkg install mkdocs" also my vagrant image for oi-docs is using the IPS mkdocs package: https://github.com/OpenIndiana/vagrantfiles I can confirm that there's problems with the mkdocs IPS package as it is based on the old 2.7 Python. David Stes ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 04:36:15PM +0200, Aurélien Larcher wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 4:30 PM Marcel Telka wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 04:18:01PM +0200, Aurélien Larcher wrote: > > > We could define some rules or information depending on the nature of the > > > package to mark which dependencies are expected. > > > Some python modules have been added for the sake of resolving a > > dependency > > > while others have no consumer in userland but are expected to be > > installed > > > as "standalone" and consumed by users directly. > > > > > > Also I am not sure I understood which type of dependencies are considered > > > here: > > > - resolved within userland either directly or added explicitly in the > > > manifest > > > - build requirements > > > - dependencies detected by pipdeptree (which are a superset of what > > > pkg/userland detects) > > > > > > I just want to make sure that we do not miss some border effects. > > > > Okay, I'll stop to obsolete more python related packages and leave it as > > it is for now so everybody have a chance to add back packages that were > > obsoleted, but they are needed for any reason. > > > > I am not asking you to stop anything at all, I am just asking questions to > understand if this will not bite us back at some point. I won't obsolete any package from the list below until end of October 2022. If I see no PR trying to rebuild them to support python 3.7+ till end of October 2022, then I might propose to obsolete them. library/python/backport_abc library/python/backports.functools_lru_cache library/python/backports.ssl_match_hostname library/python/colorama library/python/decorator library/python/enum library/python/flamegraph library/python/funcsigs library/python/ipaddress library/python/ipython library/python/ipython_genutils library/python/notify2 library/python/pickleshare library/python/prompt-toolkit library/python/pyatspi2 library/python/pycups library/python/pygobject library/python/pygtk2 library/python/python-compizconfig library/python/python-xdg library/python/python-xlib library/python/rbtools library/python/simplegeneric library/python/traitlets Thanks. -- +---+ | Marcel Telka e-mail: mar...@telka.sk | |homepage: http://telka.sk/ | +---+ ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 4:30 PM Marcel Telka wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 04:18:01PM +0200, Aurélien Larcher wrote: > > We could define some rules or information depending on the nature of the > > package to mark which dependencies are expected. > > Some python modules have been added for the sake of resolving a > dependency > > while others have no consumer in userland but are expected to be > installed > > as "standalone" and consumed by users directly. > > > > Also I am not sure I understood which type of dependencies are considered > > here: > > - resolved within userland either directly or added explicitly in the > > manifest > > - build requirements > > - dependencies detected by pipdeptree (which are a superset of what > > pkg/userland detects) > > > > I just want to make sure that we do not miss some border effects. > > Okay, I'll stop to obsolete more python related packages and leave it as > it is for now so everybody have a chance to add back packages that were > obsoleted, but they are needed for any reason. > I am not asking you to stop anything at all, I am just asking questions to understand if this will not bite us back at some point. If you feel that you have everything covered then it is fine by me. Seeing the stream of obsoletions without warning was quite surprising and raised a few questions. You know how you want to handle things, but this is maybe less clear to others. At least maybe some indications on how to add the packages back and make sure there is no mistake or loss of consistency with the location/naming etc.. Kind regards, Aurélien > > -- > +---+ > | Marcel Telka e-mail: mar...@telka.sk | > |homepage: http://telka.sk/ | > +---+ > > ___ > oi-dev mailing list > oi-...@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev > -- --- Praise the Caffeine embeddings ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 4:00 PM Marcel Telka wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 03:18:29PM +0200, Aurélien Larcher wrote: > > I do not understand the need for obsoleting the entire package and > removing > > all the files instead of updating on the go. > > > > Could you explain the motivation? > > There is no particular need. It is just simpler to obsolete than to > update. And since there is no known consumer, then the obsoletion is > the obvious option chosen. > We could define some rules or information depending on the nature of the package to mark which dependencies are expected. Some python modules have been added for the sake of resolving a dependency while others have no consumer in userland but are expected to be installed as "standalone" and consumed by users directly. Also I am not sure I understood which type of dependencies are considered here: - resolved within userland either directly or added explicitly in the manifest - build requirements - dependencies detected by pipdeptree (which are a superset of what pkg/userland detects) I just want to make sure that we do not miss some border effects. > > > To me this seems a bit of overhead, like removing the mkdocs, cython, > numpy > > packages completely from the tree instead of updating them. > > Feel free to create PRs to get them back. > > > We therefore lose track of what was in the tree and people may start from > > scratch all over again. > > > > Maybe you intend to provide some level of automation later? > > Maybe. If I find it easy to do I'll do so, but I've no immediate plan > to do so. > > > An earlier heads-up before starting to remove everything could have been > > nice to have a chance to update a few components in advance and avoid the > > mumbo-jumbo. > > Sorry. I try to do my best. Nothing is perfect. > > Anyway, an earlier update/rebuild of those packages for non-EOLed python > would be nice from you before you left them fall out of support and be > surprised that they are disappearing. > > Sorry, talking is easy. > > > Thank you. > > -- > +---+ > | Marcel Telka e-mail: mar...@telka.sk | > |homepage: http://telka.sk/ | > +---+ > > ___ > oi-dev mailing list > oi-...@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev > -- --- Praise the Caffeine embeddings ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] FLAG-DAY: We started to obsolete python 2.7 and 3.5
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 2:25 PM Marcel Telka wrote: > Hi, > > Currently we provide Python versions 2.7, 3.5, 3.7, and 3.9 for > OpenIndiana, while version 3.9 is the default version. > > Both Python 2.7 and 3.5 are no longer supported for two or almost three > years now respectively - see > https://devguide.python.org/versions/#versions for details, so we > started to obsolete them. Since there are many related packages that > needs to be rebuilt to get python 2.7 and 3.5 obsoleted, this transition > is expected to take long time (probably weeks, maybe months). > > There are basically two sets of related packages: > > #1 software that uses python (e.g. gimp), and > #2 packages that provide some enhancement to python; these are usually >python modules, for example cherrypy. > > For #1 we just need to rebuild packages that require python 2.7 or 3.5 > so they start to require either python 3.7, or python 3.9. Volunteers > are welcome! > > For #2 the situation is a bit more complex. The name of all packages in > this set is starting with 'library/python'. There is usually a basic > package (e.g. library/python/cherrypy) and few version specific packages > (e.g. library/python/cherrypy-35, library/python/cherrypy-37, > library/python/cherrypy-39). Another example is library/python/pycups > and its library/python/pycups-27 and library/python/pycups-35. > > For such packages we will slowly obsolete their -27 and -35 variants. > In a case there is neither -37 nor -39 variant already available, nor it > is needed for some other package, we will end up with all package > variants obsoleted. If this happens, then in addition to obsolete of > both -27 and -35 we will obsolete the base package too. > > For example, cherrypy. There are already -35, -37, and -39 variants. > We will obsolete the -35 variant and both -37 and -39 will be kept, so > we will keep the basic library/python/cherrypy too. > > When looking at pycups, we will obsolete both -27 and -35 variants. > Let's assume there is currently no other package that needs pycups, so > we would end with orphaned library/python/pycups, so we will obsolete > the library/python/pycups package too. > > Based on the rule above we already obsoleted following packages > recently: > > library/python/augeas > library/python/backports.shutil_get_terminal_size > library/python/backports.tempfile > library/python/cheetah > library/python/click > library/python/cssutils > library/python/cython > library/python/dulwich > library/python/geoip > library/python/elixir > library/python/import-profiler > library/python/kafka-python > library/python/livereload > library/python/m2crypto > library/python/mkdocs-bootstrap > library/python/mkdocs-bootswatch > library/python/mkdocs > library/python/netaddr > library/python/netifaces > library/python/numpy > library/python/pygtksourceview > library/python/pymongo > library/python/pyorbit > library/python/pyrex > library/python/pyro > library/python/python-ldap > library/python/python-memcached > library/python/python-mysql > library/python/python-notify > library/python/python-sexy > library/python/pywbem > library/python/scientific-py > library/python/sqlalchemy > library/python/typing > library/python/unittest2 > > Here is a list of packages that could get possibly obsoleted soon: > > library/python/backport_abc > library/python/backports.functools_lru_cache > library/python/backports.ssl_match_hostname > library/python/colorama > library/python/decorator > library/python/enum > library/python/flamegraph > library/python/funcsigs > library/python/ipaddress > library/python/ipython > library/python/ipython_genutils > library/python/notify2 > library/python/pickleshare > library/python/prompt-toolkit > library/python/pyatspi2 > library/python/pycups > library/python/pygobject > library/python/pygtk2 > library/python/python-compizconfig > library/python/python-xdg > library/python/python-xlib > library/python/rbtools > library/python/simplegeneric > library/python/traitlets > > If you need any package from these lists then please create a pull > request (see https://github.com/OpenIndiana/oi-userland/pulls) to get > the package back and built for python 3.7 and/or 3.9 (in a case it is on > the first list of already obsoleted packages), or either let us know or > create a pull request to rebuild the package for python 3.7 and/or 3.9 > (if it is on the second list of packages we could possibly obsolete). > > Any help with this task is very welcome (for example pull requests to > get software in set #1 rebuilt). > > Please note that support for building python modules for python 2.7 and > 3.5 was already dropped from oi-userland. > I do not understand the need for obsoleting the entire package and removing all the files instead of updating on the go. Could you explain the motivation? To me this seems a bit of overhead, like removing the mkdocs, cython, numpy packages completely from the tree instead of updating them. We
