Hi, Brian, thanks a lot for all the details that you're giving on the message below.
Since python-kombu doesn't depend on anymore on python-librabbitmq, and that it migrated to Jessie, we don't have any reverse dependencies for python-librabbitmq anymore. So probably, it'd be a good idea to just ask for the package removal now. Brian, what do you think? Shall I proceed to open the bug against ftp.debian.org so that the package python-librabbitmq is completely removed from Sid and Jessie? Michael, you're listed as uploader for python-librabbitmq, do you agree? Thomas Goirand (zigo) On 07/23/2014 07:50 AM, Brian May wrote: > Hello, > > Thank you for your email. > > I assume you are reacting to the "is marked for autoremoval from > testing" you would have received from Debian. > > Unfortunately, as much as these are scary looking messages, I believe I > had already resolved the issue. I sent a email to debian-python mailing > list, however maybe you did not see it. > > First an apology: like I already said > in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=747270#15, I used > the wrong package names, and the confusion appears to have been carried > across in your email. > > python-librabbitmq != python-amqp > > python-librabbitmq is the older library that uses C bindings, and only > supports Python2. It has the bug as mentioned in this bug #747270. So > far there doesn't appear to be any real interest in resolving the > bug. https://github.com/celery/librabbitmq > > This is not surprising, as there is a newer library that is entirely > native Python code, that supports Python2 and Python3. In Debian > unstable, this library is called python-amqp (not to be confused with > python-amqplib in wheezy, which I believe is an earlier version of > python-amqp). https://github.com/celery/py-amqp > > Both python-librabbitmq and python-amqp are maintained upstream by the > Celery project. > > My understanding is that python-amqp can be used anywhere > where python-librabbitmq was used, and it is API is compatible. This > explains when python-kombu 3.0.19-1 has the following in > its depends: > > python-librabbitmq | python-amqp (>= 1.4.5) > > Unfortunately, this means the older broken library gets installed > automatically as the preferred version. > > So I raised the severity of the bug against python-librabbitmq to Grave > (***not*** python-amqp), either to raise interest in fixing the problem, > or have the older broken library removed. > > Unfortunately, the one issue I forgot is that python-kombu 3.0.19-1 > build depends against both python-librabbitmq and python-amqp. So it was > marked as broken, and anything that build depends on python-kombu was > also marked as broken, which resulted in a lot of scary looking emails > being sent. > > Note that no action would have been taken until August the 20th, there > was no need to panic. > > Yesterday, I rectified the situation by uploading python-kombu version > 3.0.19-2 (as part of the Debian Python Maintainer team). This version no > longer depends on python-librabbitmq. When this version hits testing, > all problems should disappear. At the time I also sent a email to the > debian-python mailing list explaining my solution to the "is marked for > autoremoval from testing" automatic emails. > > > On 23 July 2014 01:31, Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org > <mailto:z...@debian.org>> wrote: > > though you didn't give any justification on why python-amqp is > > "unusable". As much as I understand, there's a single use case (ie: with > celery) where there's a serious problem. Knowing that OpenStack makes > extensive use of python-amqp, and that Ubuntu is also using the same > version, I seriously doubt that it is unusable as you wrote. Also, > python-amqp doesn't depend on python-librabbitmq. However, python-kombu > does. So why are you even talking about python-amqp? > > > > I didn't intend to say python-amqp was unusable. I intended to say > python-librabbitmq was unusable, as per this bug report. > > I posted a followup message when I realized I got this wrong. > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=747270#15 > > Apologies again for the mistake. > > python-amqp is the solution to this breakage, and I have no problems > with it. > > So when you say "Knowing that OpenStack makes extensive use of > python-amqp, and that Ubuntu is also using the same version, I seriously > doubt that it is unusable as you wrote.", you haven't given any > information to suggest that python-librabbitmq is not broken. You > said python-amqp is not broken, and I already know that. > > > All of the above are to me, signs that "severity grave" isn't correct. > > I'm therefore downgrading it to "important". Please don't switch it back > to grave unless you justify it accordingly. > > > I feel you could have waited one day for a response from me... > > The key question, as I see it: Is there any need to keep maintaining the > old python-librabbitmq when we have a perfectly good replacement that is > far better? > > If python-librabbitmq still serves a useful purpose that cannot be > replaced by python-amqp, and it still works for this purpose, then I > agree, Grave was inappropriate for this bug report. We will need to come > up with some other solution to the problems with celery. > > However, as you yourself said "Knowing that OpenStack makes extensive > use of python-amqp", there should be no problem if python-librabbitmq > disappears, because python-librabbitmq is not python-amqp. > > I discussed these issues on the debian-python team mailing lists, it > appears maybe I should have included openstack lists too? > > Thanks > -- > Brian May <br...@microcomaustralia.com.au > <mailto:br...@microcomaustralia.com.au>> _______________________________________________ Python-modules-team mailing list Python-modules-team@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-modules-team
