Bug#935686: RM: python-translitcodec -- RoM; no Python 3 support and no reverse deps; low popcon

Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal User: debian-python@lists.debian.org Usertag: py2removal The current upstream code claims to support Python 3. Popcon is 14. Reverse deps checked with dak rm -Rnb python-translitcodec -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#935688: RM: unittest-xml-reporting -- RoM; no Python 3 support and no reverse deps; low popcon

Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal User: debian-python@lists.debian.org Usertag: py2removal Latest upstream code supports Python 3. There is a Python 3 request bug, #737790, 5.5 years old. Popcon is 34. Reverse deps checked with dak rm -Rnb python-xmlrunner -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc D

Bug#935687: RM: python-txosc -- RoM; ancient; no Python 3 support and no reverse deps; low popcon

Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal User: debian-python@lists.debian.org Usertag: py2removal There is no upstream development at https://bitbucket.org/arjan/txosc since 2011. Popcon is 6. Reverse deps checked with dak rm -Rnb python-txosc -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP sig

Bug#935689: RM: python-unipath -- RoM; ancient; no Python 3 support and no reverse deps; low popcon

Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal User: debian-python@lists.debian.org Usertag: py2removal No upstream releases since 2008. Popcon is 17. Reverse deps checked with dak rm -Rnb python-unipath -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#935685: RM: python-opster -- RoM; no Python 3 support and no reverse deps; low popcon

Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal User: debian-python@lists.debian.org Usertag: py2removal https://github.com/piranha/opster/ supports Python 3. Popcon is 14. Reverse deps checked with dak rm -Rnb python-opster -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Watch file for riverbankcomputing (QScintilla)

Hi Dmitry Thanks a lot, this works perfectly > version=3 > opts=dversionmangle=s/\+dfsg// \ > https://www.riverbankcomputing.com/software/qscintilla/download \ > /static/Downloads/QScintilla/[\d.]+/QScintilla_gpl-([\d.]+)\.tar\.gz I first made the mistake of removing the space after "download" wih

Re: Python2/Qt4 removal

Hi Scott Great, thanks. I will make one upgrade with python2/Qt4 and then start preparing for its removal. Regards Gudjon

Re: Removing py2 support from python-xattr

On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 08:03:55PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Saturday, August 24, 2019 6:28:10 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: > > Please, let's generalize and see the whole picture. There will be A LOT > > more cases like this one, and I don't think that waiting forever will > > solve the si

Bug#935700: RM: sphinx-issuetracker -- ROM; Python 2 only; dead upstream; no reverse dependencies

Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal User: debian-python@lists.debian.org Usertag: py2removal Last upstream commit was in 2014, and upstream does not respond to pull requests like [1]. Reverse dependencies checked with with dak rm -Rn sphinx-issuetracker. [1]: https://github.com/ignatenkobra

Re: py2-rm: a few leaf packages to work on

On 25.08.19 00:08, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 8/24/19 10:38 AM, Neil Williams wrote: >> How is that graph turned into a list of packages? It's too large to >> scan manually. > > Well, I did it manually... and this is only a short list, as a > suggestion for a todo list, so nothing exhaustive... I

Re: py2-rm: a few leaf packages to work on

On 24.08.19 07:03, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Thursday, August 15, 2019 8:08:41 AM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: >> Hi there! >> >> According to the daily graph I built here: >> http://py2graph.infomaniak.ch/py2.7.deps.svg >> >> we can work on Python 2 removal for the below packages. Note that I have

Git, gbp blues

Hi list I'm sorry to say but I am no friend of git for Debian packaging but I am a big wannabe. This page has been very helpful: https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging It says $ gbp pq import which has more or less solved my problems when trying to upgrade a package. Isn't this an error. Sh

Re: py2-rm: a few leaf packages to work on

On Sunday, August 25, 2019 10:55:55 AM EDT Matthias Klose wrote: > On 24.08.19 07:03, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > On Thursday, August 15, 2019 8:08:41 AM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: > >> Hi there! > >> > >> According to the daily graph I built here: > >> http://py2graph.infomaniak.ch/py2.7.deps.svg >

Re: Git, gbp blues

On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 09:40:16PM +0200, Guðjón Guðjónsson wrote: > Isn't this an error. Shouldn't it be git checkout? > $ gbp checkout debian/master Yes. > But I still find working with patch queues difficult especially with > new upstream where the old patches don't apply correctly. > I tried t

Re: Git, gbp blues

Hi Andrey Thanks for the answer. On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 9:50 PM Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > > Isn't this an error. Shouldn't it be git checkout? > > $ gbp checkout debian/master > Yes. You mean it should be git checkout? > > If you ran gbp pq import after importing the new tarball and it didn't

Re: Git, gbp blues

On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 10:01:02PM +0200, Guðjón Guðjónsson wrote: > > > Isn't this an error. Shouldn't it be git checkout? > > > $ gbp checkout debian/master > > Yes. > You mean it should be git checkout? Yes. > > If you ran gbp pq import after importing the new tarball and it didn't say > > "Pat

Re: Git, gbp blues

Hi Guðjón! On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 10:01:02PM +0200, Guðjón Guðjónsson wrote: > I did follow the procedure but I don't know what to do if a patch > doesn't apply cleanly. > I did try > gbp pq import > gbp:info: Trying to apply patches at > 'c72f39a3a32b5e5c1eb7f9aaf7176e942e85d804' > gbp:warning:

Re: Git, gbp blues

Hi Dmitry and Anrdrey On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 10:19 PM Dmitry Shachnev wrote: > The correct procedure is running “gbp pq import” *before* importing a new > tarball. Then after importing you do “gbp pq rebase”. In fact I did do that. > > Sometimes I myself forget to run “gbp pq import”. In this ca

Re: Git, gbp blues

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 08:20:13AM +0200, Guðjón Guðjónsson wrote: > > The correct procedure is running “gbp pq import” *before* importing a new > > tarball. Then after importing you do “gbp pq rebase”. > In fact I did do that. Then you would get an error message when trying to do that second time.