1 |
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 4:08 PM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> $ git grep -l mgorny@g.o '**/metadata.xml' | cut -d/ -f1-2 | |
4 |
> xargs gpy-py2 2>/dev/null |
5 |
> |
6 |
|
7 |
I have no idea what gpy-py2 is, but I'll take your word for it. |
8 |
|
9 |
In any case, the solution in this case is to send a nice email to |
10 |
-dev-announce saying: |
11 |
|
12 |
We're removing python2 around <date>. You can help us out by updating |
13 |
any packages you have that use python2. If you want to easily |
14 |
identify these packages just do <insert quick script here>. |
15 |
|
16 |
I think the problem here is that we're basically telling maintainers |
17 |
that the beatings will continue until morale improves. Then we're |
18 |
wondering why nothing is getting done. |
19 |
|
20 |
I'm not saying anybody has to do it a particular way - it just seems |
21 |
obvious that the way we're doing it is more successful at getting |
22 |
people upset than actually getting results. |
23 |
|
24 |
Ideally you would just open a tracker bug and then per-package bugs |
25 |
for every impacted package. That would be the cleanest solution. If |
26 |
that is too painful then by all means do some email announcements, but |
27 |
make it easy for devs to realize when they're missing something. |
28 |
|
29 |
Having a package mask be the first time a maintainer finds out that |
30 |
they have a problem isn't good. Now, you can blame that on the |
31 |
maintainer, or you can blame that on the python team, but either way |
32 |
the users end up getting exposed to breakage unnecessarily. |
33 |
|
34 |
-- |
35 |
Rich |