On 7/16/19 5:42 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> no, that's your interpretation, not mine. If an important enough application
> still needs it, we should ship it.
Could you please clarify what you call "an important enough
application"? Important for who/what? Who's to decide, and on what criteria?
A
On July 16, 2019 3:42:47 PM UTC, Matthias Klose wrote:
>On 16.07.19 17:31, Julien Puydt wrote:
>> Le 16/07/2019 à 17:21, Andrey Rahmatullin a écrit :
>>> Python 2 is included in buster and so will be supported for several
>>> years.
>>>
>>
>> The starting point of the thread was :
>> 1. Ok, bu
On 16.07.19 17:31, Julien Puydt wrote:
> Le 16/07/2019 à 17:21, Andrey Rahmatullin a écrit :
>> Python 2 is included in buster and so will be supported for several
>> years.
>>
>
> The starting point of the thread was :
> 1. Ok, buster has Python 2 so even if upstream drops it, we will still
> sup
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 11:20 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
>
> On 16.07.19 16:52, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > I lost some of this thread - should we request a transition
> > from the release team? I was looking for the list of blockers
> > to dropping Python 2 and couldn't find anything except this
>
Le 16/07/2019 à 17:21, Andrey Rahmatullin a écrit :
> Python 2 is included in buster and so will be supported for several
> years.
>
The starting point of the thread was :
1. Ok, buster has Python 2 so even if upstream drops it, we will still
support it for the years to come for our users ;
2. bu
Le 16/07/2019 à 16:52, Paul Tagliamonte a écrit :
> I lost some of this thread - should we request a transition
> from the release team? I was looking for the list of blockers
> to dropping Python 2 and couldn't find anything except this
> thread (where we're still figuring out what to do, of cours
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:52:14AM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> I lost some of this thread - should we request a transition
> from the release team? I was looking for the list of blockers
> to dropping Python 2 and couldn't find anything except this
> thread (where we're still figuring out what
On 16.07.19 16:52, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> I lost some of this thread - should we request a transition
> from the release team? I was looking for the list of blockers
> to dropping Python 2 and couldn't find anything except this
> thread (where we're still figuring out what to do, of course)
#93
I lost some of this thread - should we request a transition
from the release team? I was looking for the list of blockers
to dropping Python 2 and couldn't find anything except this
thread (where we're still figuring out what to do, of course)
I do want to keep in mind that Python 2 is EOL and dea
On 08/07/2019 17:58, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Maybe we can also do a mass-bugfilling after a period we can discuss
> (probably during Debconf?).
The bug report would say 'This package will be removed in x months if it
will be still python2 only'?
The targets would be every python2-only packages or
On 2019-07-08 10:00, Elena ``of Valhalla'' wrote:
> I don't think it would be accepted by backports, since it goes against
> the requirement that stuff in backports is in testing (and meant to
> remain there when it becomes stable).
I'm not sure, but building an additional binary package from the
On 7/9/19 12:22 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, July 8, 2019 5:45:17 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> How can I get debtree to use Sid instead of Buster (as I'd prefer to
>> keep this VM running Buster)? I could set this VM up and a cron job for
>> how long we need it... Though it looks like
On 7/9/19 12:05 AM, Rick Thomas wrote:
>
>
>> On Jul 8, 2019, at 2:45 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>
>> What I did so far:
>> debtree -R --rdeps-depth=100 python2.7 >py2.7.deps.dot
>> dot -Tsvg -o py2.7.deps.svg py2.7.deps.dot
>>
>> The result is here:
>> http://py2graph.infomaniak.ch/py2.7.deps.s
On Monday, July 8, 2019 5:45:17 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 7/8/19 6:28 PM, Stewart Ferguson wrote:
> > On 2019-07-08 00:13:45, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >> On 7/7/19 5:31 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >>> you can start dropping it now, however please don't drop anything yet
> >>> with
> >>> reve
> On Jul 8, 2019, at 2:45 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> What I did so far:
> debtree -R --rdeps-depth=100 python2.7 >py2.7.deps.dot
> dot -Tsvg -o py2.7.deps.svg py2.7.deps.dot
>
> The result is here:
> http://py2graph.infomaniak.ch/py2.7.deps.svg
Fascinating…
Can you give us some hints to i
On 7/8/19 6:28 PM, Stewart Ferguson wrote:
> On 2019-07-08 00:13:45, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 7/7/19 5:31 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> you can start dropping it now, however please don't drop anything yet with
>>> reverse dependencies. So leaf packages first.
>>
>> I'm sorry, but I think I nee
On 2019-07-08 00:13:45, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 7/7/19 5:31 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> you can start dropping it now, however please don't drop anything yet with
>> reverse dependencies. So leaf packages first.
>
> I'm sorry, but I think I need to contest this. Doing things in order,
> first
On 7/8/19 10:10 AM, Ansgar wrote:
> Thomas Goirand writes:
>> On 7/7/19 5:31 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> you can start dropping it now, however please don't drop anything yet with
>>> reverse dependencies. So leaf packages first.
>>
>> I'm sorry, but I think I need to contest this. Doing things
On 2019-07-08 at 07:16:01 +, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote:
> it would be nice, if the python2 packages could be skipped in bulleye but not
> for backports in buster.
>
> Is it something which could be envision ?
I don't think it would be accepted by backports, since it goes against
the requ
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 7/7/19 5:31 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> you can start dropping it now, however please don't drop anything yet with
>> reverse dependencies. So leaf packages first.
>
> I'm sorry, but I think I need to contest this. Doing things in order,
> first leaf, then go all the w
On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 07:16:01AM +, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote:
> it would be nice, if the python2 packages could be skipped in bulleye but not
> for backports in buster.
>
> Is it something which could be envision ?
Not in the main backports, maybe in -sloppy. And it will be hard or
imp
On 7/8/19 12:27 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Are you 100% certain that there isn't some small subset of python2 packages
> we
> will end up needing for bullseye?
I'm 100% certain that we should as much as possible avoid this, indeed.
I'm also convinced we should do our best to speed-up the Pytho
On Sunday, July 7, 2019 6:13:45 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 7/7/19 5:31 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > On 07.07.19 16:55, Drew Parsons wrote:
> >> On 2019-07-07 22:46, Mo Zhou wrote:
> >>> Hi science team,
> >>>
> >>> By the way, when do we start dropping python2 support?
> >>> The upstreams
On 7/7/19 5:31 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 07.07.19 16:55, Drew Parsons wrote:
>> On 2019-07-07 22:46, Mo Zhou wrote:
>>> Hi science team,
>>>
>>> By the way, when do we start dropping python2 support?
>>> The upstreams of the whole python scientific computing
>>> stack had already started dropp
On 2019-07-07 23:31, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 07.07.19 16:55, Drew Parsons wrote:
On 2019-07-07 22:46, Mo Zhou wrote:
Hi science team,
By the way, when do we start dropping python2 support?
The upstreams of the whole python scientific computing
stack had already started dropping it.
Good que
On 07.07.19 16:55, Drew Parsons wrote:
> On 2019-07-07 22:46, Mo Zhou wrote:
>> Hi science team,
>>
>> By the way, when do we start dropping python2 support?
>> The upstreams of the whole python scientific computing
>> stack had already started dropping it.
>
> Good question. I think it is on the
26 matches
Mail list logo
