https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=270358
--- Comment #139 from Charlie Li <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Kevin Bowling from comment #138) You don't get to make threats like this either, especially not with unpaid volunteers. The one who is most angry and feeling burnt out without actually being burnt out is me. Until you have actually witnessed, dealt with and reconciled all the breaking changes, on top of all the whining from everyone who don't have a clue, continuing these comments don't help. The way you (and everyone else) can help is by following directions. And speaking of breakages, I'm not even through the USE_PYTHON=distutils portion of the exp-run (USE_PYTHON=pep517 consumers to run separately) and we already have some common themes: A number of consumers fail stage-qa because tests are getting installed into ${PYTHON_SITELIBDIR} (site-packages) as its own package/namespace. This is due to improper package discovery practices (from devel/py-homebase): Error: Python package installs top-level 'test/' directory in site-packages Error: Location: lib/python3.11/site-packages/test Error: This causes file conflicts with other packages. Exclude it via pyproject.toml: Error: [tool.setuptools.packages.find] Error: exclude = ["test", "test.*"] Error: See: https://setuptools.pypa.io/en/latest/userguide/package_discovery.html I'm inclined to mark these cases BROKEN since these are more likely to not have as much recent upstream activity in any form. www/py-html5lib still references a number of ancient setuptools (ie < 26) primitives, ostensibly for maximum compatibility with even EOLed Python. A fork, www/py-html5lib-modern, still uses references pkg_resources (as does www/py-html5lib). This is removed in 82 and later, which is why this PR holds on 81, but nonetheless prints a huge deprecation notice. The remaining pkg_resources is not guaranteed to work properly, and this non-guarantee is hit here. Given that the upstream repository has not had commit or other maintainer activity in about two years, some local patching may be warranted, which would be covered in a separate PR referencing this one. This port gets its own mention due to blocking many other ports from being built/tested, particularly those with active upstream activity. A few others have version specifiers that violate the Python packaging standards. More to come. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
