From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 625CC138334 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:34:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D1259E08A2; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:34:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ot1-x342.google.com (mail-ot1-x342.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::342]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8CAB3E0844 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:34:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ot1-x342.google.com with SMTP id i15so2742431oto.7 for ; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 06:34:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=5jcg/rMHKcCgI2j0H18u6h0XVf+3oWVfWbGpdmttz9I=; b=skXb0I4IJ8K+jfjMPibhm6QOcQ9N7SJ7wdZrrh0CZy50fZoJ0VgJ6TZsqL/b/PB63v 5nCSCqfL8ZYjXcEcL+xUJY4oDFqZvsZ1YoD36xe7LOzj+bXJOITPPWediv8I4/B7qvsG YLWXg4DgbQGdGgxj2ZM7+RuLxMxhRl+JVvF6WKAo32it4jd3ExFeAdV+T24iJq9xJu5I Tq2K/2mtAiJQV+vFSy5UC+Ns3iDeWZJtZnk9isG8RqqVYjogB3oNPOXv2HRxh/CU+RZc 7LDAwNCShAWXVAfd5oU4JJgaMDFsxdpVbq5UhnyNFgS6D7SjX4FbVEjt2SDoPfi7SQE0 BdQg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=5jcg/rMHKcCgI2j0H18u6h0XVf+3oWVfWbGpdmttz9I=; b=KEx3HJNYv0Z4yL7e256rf8D2minVovoMUnvsje0nh7GiSa7qc3W3B6mTGPPU/JQjIQ 9bEZVOX1MfeEQbvIGh5yibQbg8K5ZVoj//JYF9xFm1ktp02Qxui239lp/hXLPEBCndSd 7AgH64KiIOus3lMlMLxOrNvCvVBx6YJs5LsYBaM6hRBwT/yDhJBz4ZfXBr7jAYMhTFcS ZScy7IXIWktoP34qlpjy7sACbJH0A/cGZFT9UztYFx/mqQqTxvbvqzxVBo9jU9iHKFxK d1rtuLVlAan9KBVnBtAppoksLwba+M4JL+CsNmXrBAxlZga9Aub0AQ1pigi8VTarLlQA rFoQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWWUkVbxwr4NEP75BFTp1DpBr2mVqcbYwVflYOxxvGzqfGTdo7K qyG6o/4E+Td5iPn9hd7dI0g6WOc755w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy+ddTNP1YHGRNdLqVeh9u/jnYlefwzSSkCPm0b6lyfk3on+Ik/XKDaGPkkUyIi0kVJWVvLTQ== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:554f:: with SMTP id h15mr7055527oti.338.1575556472127; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 06:34:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from icarus (072-189-064-225.res.spectrum.com. [72.189.64.225]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f1sm3473375otq.4.2019.12.05.06.34.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 05 Dec 2019 06:34:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:34:16 -0500 From: William Breathitt Gray To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: Aaron Bauman Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] unsanctioned python 2.7 crusade Message-ID: <20191205143416.GA3209@icarus> References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) X-Archives-Salt: e4e40326-ebad-46c0-b7d0-c06efe9b414a X-Archives-Hash: c5621ef97a8e5b2027700dc6abda7f21 On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 09:24:26AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 8:59 AM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > > It's quite another to mask random packages that have USE flags to > > optionally support whatever python 2.7 library. If you're going to > > last rites these, talk with the maintainer first, and only then, send > > emails one at a time. Doing that en masse isn't appropriate. > > ++ - I have no idea if that happened. For anything USE-controlled it > would make more sense to file a bug or mask the package-flag combo > itself. > > > > > On another topic, I'd prefer for python 2.7 not to be removed from > > gentoo. Tons of code still uses it. > > > > I'm sure a million people would share that preference. I'm not sure > what the upstream/security status is of 2.7. Obviously to keep it > around it would need to be reasonably secure, and somebody within > Gentoo would have to want to maintain it. That's basically the > criteria for keeping anything like this around. If somebody stepped > up and said "I'm maintaining 2.7 and here is why it will remain > secure..." I doubt they'd get a lot of resistance. > > -- > Rich If Python 2.7 is EOL upstream then it sounds like upstream will not be maintaining it any longer; i.e. no more bug fixes nor support. That means Gentoo would have to maintain its own Python 2.7 fork if it's to remain in the repository. Naturally, maintaining a Python fork is not something the Gentoo team is ready to do, so it makes sense to remove Python 2.7 now that the EOL date is approaching. Besides, the Python 2.7 EOL date has been known since 2015, so those python 2-only packages will have had at least 5 years to migrate to Python 3. William Breathitt Gray