Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] profiles/package.deprecated: deprecate python:2.7

[Aaron Bauman]

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:02:34PM +0100, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> A few points:
>
> 1. "only supports Py2" does not seem to warrant to mask leaf packages
>    and contradicts to Michał's explanation of cleanup effort:
>      See https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/04d419ebef01e80a43fc3b301e11afb6
>    Please reconcile the goals within the python@ team. Ask team lead
>    if not sure and provide clear guidance for others. "only supports Py2"
>    is not good enough explanation.
>
>    Leaf packages should be able to stay up to 2021-01-01, no? I'd suggest
>    adding them to packages.deprecated instead.
>

Yes, it does warrant it. As we must remove/convert all leaf packages
before the interpreter can be safely removed. I believe Michal clarified
this in another email. It is a continuous effort...

> 2. I decided to drop python support in a hurry to unbreak world upgrade
>    for users and myself. If I had some time I would prefer to do that in
>    higher confidence and have a chance to look at python3 support in the
>    package.
>    But now I chucked python2 scripting entirely probably breaking a few
>    users. I don't see it as a good thing.
>
>    After Michał's explanation I am considering to restore python2 support
>    while I investigate python3 support feasibility.
>
> Thus no. Not "All done". We will probably have exactly the same conversation
> next month if nothing changes in the process.
>

Restore the py2 support then and convert it to py3 as required. We have
a long ways to go... sorry your package got caught up in the mix...

> > There is no discrimination of which packages get masked and when.
>
> I fail to interpret this phrase. Does it mean you are about to mask all
> python2-only packages ~now-ish?
>

Sorry for the misunderstanding/language barrier. Yes, the intent is to
rid the tree if py2 dependent packages. We have been doing this in
incremental stages in order to allow developers time to "save" packages
as needed. Generally, most packages go away, but occasionally packages
such as this wind up in the fold...

This is because there are a myriad of packages out there... it would
take *years* to rid the tree of them any other way.

> > Additionally, masking seems to drive the attention vice all the other discussions, bugs, etc.
>
> I am not a native English speaker. I don't know what exactly this phrase
> means.
>

It simply means that masking packages gains the attention of developers
to drop Python support, convert their packages to py3, or let it go
away. Opening a bug for the 1k+ packages would be time consuming and
mostly meaningless. Again, the numbers from every "round" of masks have
shown that the *vast* majority of packages simply get removed.

> It's not hard to get an attention by filing a bug against maintainer.
> I personally read my bugs and try to act on them. I believe devs are still
> required to have Bugzilla account.
>

Yes, you may respond along with a few other devs. Again, pure numbers
here... most packages just get tree cleaned. Few get "saved."

> > As we can see, folks will complain no matter what method is used. I could spend my days opening bugs and hoping for a response, yelling loudly on the ML for others to "pitch in" etc.
>
> I totally understand where the frustration comes from. If you
> decided to do everything an your own it's challenging.
>
> Moreover, I'm actively willing to fix whatever problems packages
> I maintain have. I just need to know about them. Preferably slightly
> before the change impacts users.
>

Thank you. Yes, please check your Py2 packages and convert/rid of them
as required.

> Support for what you are doing? I'm sure if devs agree
> on the ultimate goals you want to achieve you will get all the support.
>

There are a few *loud* voices that don't agree. Most others are very
quiet. 

-- 
Cheers,
Aaron