On Thu, 2019-12-05 at 03:56 +0100, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > Hi, > > On 2019-12-05 01:15, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > * Removal in 30 days > > Why? I understand that Py2 will reach EOL upstream status but we all > know that Py2 will *not* disappear and stop working in 26 days... > > There's no reason to mask/remove currently known working software. >
Yes, there is. Not saying about any particular package out there but the Python team is *overwhelmed*. We can't reasonably be expected to maintain 1200+ packages, many of them requiring a lot of work. It's easy to claim everything is all right without actually working on it. Many of those packages may not pose problems in the next weeks. Some of them probably already take part in the big 'target mishap' when their dependencies dropped py2 support, and more will in the coming weeks, months. Now imagine that 500+ packages are depending on pytest that doesn't support py2 anymore. And that number is probably far smaller than reality because a lot of packages are bad quality and don't run tests at all. You people need to start thinking of terms of real benefit to users. Keeping old, unmaintained, semi-broken packages has little benefit to users. Quadruplicating maintenance burden effectively harms *active* packages, and that is much more painful to users. Do you think we'd be stuck with unmaintained Python 3.6 in stable if people actively kicked stuff we can't maintain? Do you think we'd be stuck with Python 3.7 packages being *unkeyworded* on almost all arches? -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
