Dear all, I am intending to package a new dependency of textdistance called rapizfuzz (along with its dependencies jarowinkler and rapizfuzz-capi, and including rapizfuzz-cpp and jarowinkler-cpp within the packages). It's relatively low priority though (and I haven't filed ITPs yet). But it needs cython 3.0.0alpha7 or later to be able to compile.
There is talk of moving cython 3.0.0 into beta in the not-too-distant future: https://github.com/cython/cython/issues/4022 It does have some breaking changes in comparison to cython 0.29.x. I wonder what our strategy should be? Here are three reasonable approaches: (1) Keep the existing cython package (source: cython, binaries: cython3, cython-doc, cython3-dbg) and have a new package for the 3.* releases. Advantages: * won't break lots of existing packages Disadvantages: * no obvious name for new package * will end up with an old cython package over time that cannot be easily dropped * will lead to confusion - what is the cython3 package, is it the new or old version of cython? (2) Create a new cython0.29 package (source: cython0.29, binaries: cython3-0.29, cython0.29-doc, cython3-0.29-dbg for example) to house the "old" version, and the cython package becomes cython 3.0.0 Advantages: * clear naming scheme * those packages which "just work" with the new version of cython will not need to do anything to migrate * allows the cython0.29 package to be dropped in time without needing lots of renaming once no packages still rely on it Disadvantages: * there are two packages to maintain instead of just one (cython0.29 and cython) * those packages which don't work with 3.0.0 will either need patching or their dependency will need to be changed to cython3-0.29 (3) Let the cython package become cython 3.0.0 once it is released. Advantages: * only one package to maintain * keep at the cutting edge of cython development Disadvantages * may break lots of packages, requiring a lot of effort to patch them I don't know how many packages in Debian would be broken by the move to 3.0.0; that may be something worth exploring. It may well be that approach (2) makes most sense for the short term. I imagine that this is unlikely to hit before the bookworm freeze, but I wanted to flag it up now. Best wishes, Julian