1 |
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 2:18 PM Andreas Sturmlechner <asturm@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> The lack of curiosity for one's own packages' python compatibility is not just |
4 |
> a py27 isolated issue, it was a big problem with py36 -> py37 with so many |
5 |
> devs simply not filing that necessary stabilisation. |
6 |
|
7 |
That suggests that if you keep doing what you're doing, you're going |
8 |
to keep hitting your head against the wall. |
9 |
|
10 |
Right now in Gentoo there isn't really even a straightforward way for |
11 |
a maintainer to cleanly obtain a list of all the packages they |
12 |
maintain, let alone whether they use python v2. |
13 |
|
14 |
Sure, you can use the portage API to find this info. However, that is |
15 |
as easy to do for a list of all impacted packages in the tree with |
16 |
their maintainers as for any individual maintainer to obtain this info |
17 |
for their own packages. |
18 |
|
19 |
I think that if you give the maintainers a bit more info, you'll find |
20 |
them being more proactive about helping you out. Basically you would |
21 |
be helping them help you. |
22 |
|
23 |
Otherwise you're going to mask a bunch of packages and run into a |
24 |
bunch of upset devs, and as a byproduct we create a bunch of upset |
25 |
users. |
26 |
|
27 |
There is no reason to mask a package only to unmask it a few days |
28 |
later. Masks are a mechanism for deprecating packages so that users |
29 |
take action. They're not a substitute for devs talking to each other. |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
Rich |