1 |
On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 11:07:39PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, 2020-06-01 at 15:49 -0500, Matthias Maier wrote: |
3 |
> > On Mon, Jun 1, 2020, at 15:27 CDT, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > > 2020-08-01 Python 3.7 migration deadline |
6 |
> > > |
7 |
> > > After this date, we lastrite all remaining packages that haven't been |
8 |
> > > ported. This gives people roughly two months, with a ping one month |
9 |
> > > from now. |
10 |
> > > [...] |
11 |
> > > 2020-12-01 Python 3.8 migration deadline |
12 |
> > > |
13 |
> > > We lastrite all the unmigrated packages. |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > Most of the time (guess >99%) this "porting" simply consists of |
16 |
> > "keywording" with the new python target, i.e., a one-line change in the |
17 |
> > ebuild. |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> > What about we "auto keyword" all remaining packages that have a |
20 |
> > python3_6 target but lack the python3_7 target instead? Meaning, just |
21 |
> > add the python3_7 value to the corresponding PYTHON_*TARGET. |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > Given the fact how little difference there is between python3_6 and |
24 |
> > python3_7 this seems to be the appropriate, gentler approach here. |
25 |
> > |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Most of these packages are unmaintained, seriously outdated and they may |
28 |
> actually be broken with py3.7 (because they're so seriously outdated). |
29 |
> I don't see that as solving a problem, it merely shoves it under |
30 |
> the carpet and leaves us with the same shove-under-the-carpet attitude |
31 |
> for the next few years. |
32 |
> |
33 |
> I like to think of these migrations as opportunity to fix some broken |
34 |
> ebuilds, update some packages and last rite all the things that aren't |
35 |
> maintained. |
36 |
> |
37 |
|
38 |
Couldn't agree more here. Unfortunately, it is normally the big projects |
39 |
that have to deal with cleaning up the cruft. |
40 |
|
41 |
> -- |
42 |
> Best regards, |
43 |
> Michał Górny |
44 |
> |
45 |
|
46 |
-- |
47 |
Cheers, |
48 |
Aaron |