Re: pyyaml 6

2022-11-12 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 5:26:35 AM EST Scott Kitterman wrote: > On November 2, 2022 8:35:35 AM UTC, Gordon Ball wrote: > >On 19/10/2022 22:30, Gordon Ball wrote: > >> On 09/10/2022 21:39, Gordon Ball wrote: > >>> On 07/10/2022 01:13, Timo Röhling wrote: > Hi Gordon, > > * G

Re: pyyaml 6

2022-11-02 Thread Scott Kitterman
On November 2, 2022 8:35:35 AM UTC, Gordon Ball wrote: >On 19/10/2022 22:30, Gordon Ball wrote: >> On 09/10/2022 21:39, Gordon Ball wrote: >>> On 07/10/2022 01:13, Timo Röhling wrote: Hi Gordon, * Gordon Ball [2022-10-07 00:10]: > * Upload to unstable and see what breaks? >

Re: pyyaml 6

2022-11-02 Thread Gordon Ball
On 19/10/2022 22:30, Gordon Ball wrote: On 09/10/2022 21:39, Gordon Ball wrote: On 07/10/2022 01:13, Timo Röhling wrote: Hi Gordon, * Gordon Ball [2022-10-07 00:10]: * Upload to unstable and see what breaks? * Request an archive rebuild with this version and see what breaks? * File bugs agai

Re: pyyaml 6

2022-10-19 Thread Gordon Ball
On 09/10/2022 21:39, Gordon Ball wrote: On 07/10/2022 01:13, Timo Röhling wrote: Hi Gordon, * Gordon Ball [2022-10-07 00:10]: * Upload to unstable and see what breaks? * Request an archive rebuild with this version and see what breaks? * File bugs against all likely affected packages with a f

Re: pyyaml 6

2022-10-10 Thread Louis-Philippe Véronneau
On 2022-10-06 21 h 43, Paul Wise wrote: On Fri, 2022-10-07 at 00:10 +0200, Gordon Ball wrote: * Upload to unstable and see what breaks? The experimental pseudo-excuses already say several packages break: https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?experimental=1&package=pyyaml autopkgtest

Re: pyyaml 6

2022-10-09 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2022-10-09 21:39:56 +0200 (+0200), Gordon Ball wrote: [...] > gnocchi # confirm, in gnocchi/gendoc Looks like it was fixed in gnocchi 4.4.2 earlier this year (unstable still has 4.4.0). > jeepyb # confirm, in cmd/notify_impact I'm honestly surprised this is packaged for Debian, since it's jus

Re: pyyaml 6

2022-10-09 Thread Gordon Ball
On 07/10/2022 01:13, Timo Röhling wrote: > Hi Gordon, > > * Gordon Ball [2022-10-07 00:10]: >> * Upload to unstable and see what breaks? >> * Request an archive rebuild with this version and see what breaks? >> * File bugs against all likely affected packages with a fixed date for >> an upload? >

Re: pyyaml 6

2022-10-07 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2022-10-07 00:10:21 +0200 (+0200), Gordon Ball wrote: [...] > The only bug requesting it actually be upgraded is > https://bugs.debian.org/1008262 (for openstack). I don't know if > that has proved a hard blocker - I _think_ anything designed to > work with 6.x should also work with 5.4. I have

Re: pyyaml 6

2022-10-06 Thread Paul Wise
On Fri, 2022-10-07 at 00:10 +0200, Gordon Ball wrote: > * Upload to unstable and see what breaks? The experimental pseudo-excuses already say several packages break: https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?experimental=1&package=pyyaml autopkgtest for ganeti/3.0.2-1: amd64: Regression, arm64

Re: pyyaml 6

2022-10-06 Thread Timo Röhling
Hi Gordon, * Gordon Ball [2022-10-07 00:10]: * Upload to unstable and see what breaks? * Request an archive rebuild with this version and see what breaks? * File bugs against all likely affected packages with a fixed date for an upload? * Wait until after the freeze? Considering that PyYAML ha