Leo Famulari writes:
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 11:38:12AM +0200, Efraim Flashner wrote: >> We're now about a year out from the official EOL for python2 (Jan 1, >> 2020). So far we've been not adding python2 variants of packages that >> are new unless they're actually needed for something. Do we want to >> start removing python2 packages when updating other packages if they are >> leaf packages? > > This was previously discussed here: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2018-06/msg00237.html > > That discussion didn't go very far. As you mentioned, the consensus > seemed to be that we 1) relax the policy of always providing both Python > 2 and 3 packages and 2) we'll act when we need to. > > My opinion is that we should remove Python 2 packages after the upstream > EOL announcement if they are causing trouble somehow. > > But I don't think we need to remove them en masse. We offer many other > packages that are basically abandoned upstream, so I think it will be > okay to keep the Python 2 packages as long as there are no bugs or if > they are maintained somehow. I think we could also just move them to a different Guix channel entirely as a sort of legacy-support option. I am almost positive somebody among us would be willing to maintain them. Could be better than everybody wanting to maintain their own channel for it. Also, on a side note, how would this work for the python importers? Would we stop offering python2 substitutes on the build servers? There are some other questions here that I think aren't getting addressed. Brett Gilio
