| 1 |
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 04:21:14PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 4:08 PM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > $ git grep -l mgorny@g.o '**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2 | |
| 5 |
> > xargs gpy-py2 2>/dev/null |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I have no idea what gpy-py2 is, but I'll take your word for it. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> In any case, the solution in this case is to send a nice email to |
| 11 |
> -dev-announce saying: |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> We're removing python2 around <date>. You can help us out by updating |
| 14 |
> any packages you have that use python2. If you want to easily |
| 15 |
> identify these packages just do <insert quick script here>. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> I think the problem here is that we're basically telling maintainers |
| 18 |
> that the beatings will continue until morale improves. Then we're |
| 19 |
> wondering why nothing is getting done. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I'm not saying anybody has to do it a particular way - it just seems |
| 22 |
> obvious that the way we're doing it is more successful at getting |
| 23 |
> people upset than actually getting results. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Ideally you would just open a tracker bug and then per-package bugs |
| 26 |
> for every impacted package. That would be the cleanest solution. If |
| 27 |
> that is too painful then by all means do some email announcements, but |
| 28 |
> make it easy for devs to realize when they're missing something. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> Having a package mask be the first time a maintainer finds out that |
| 31 |
> they have a problem isn't good. Now, you can blame that on the |
| 32 |
> maintainer, or you can blame that on the python team, but either way |
| 33 |
> the users end up getting exposed to breakage unnecessarily. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> -- |
| 36 |
> Rich |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
I am thoroughly confused here. Some how you have completely changed your |
| 40 |
opinion from previous posts. Furthermore, this has turned into a debate |
| 41 |
of how to find packages that are Py2 only which is just absurd. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Of all the methods listed in the previous posts, the QA reports, etc. |
| 44 |
there is no excuse individuals can't find out if their package is py2 |
| 45 |
only. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Ironically, it would be a very sad state if an individual doesn't know |
| 48 |
what Python interpreter their package is compatible with. This is the |
| 49 |
essence of "maintainer" status, correct? |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Can we stop finding excuses and let folks fix their packages? |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
Obviously, the myriad of tools, ML threads, and all the other "avenues" |
| 54 |
individual developers have taken to alert others simply doesn't work... |
| 55 |
until something is p.masked... people don't budge. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
-- |
| 58 |
Cheers, |
| 59 |
Aaron |
Archives