[gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 758 bytes --]

Hello, everyone.

The most recent release of IPython removes support for Python 3.6.
 Unless I'm mistaken, this is the first very high profile package
to become 3.7+ only.  Please expect a major slay of Python 3.6 support
in its reverse dependencies today.  That is, when I finish the large
part of my today's TODO called 'immediate bumps'.

I would like to take this as an opportunity to remind you to port your
packages to Python 3.7 and 3.8.  According to our timeline [1], packages
that are not ported by the end of the year are going to be last rited.
 We would also like to switch to 3.8 in December.

[1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Python/Implementations#Implementation_support_timeline

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:29 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> I would like to take this as an opportunity to remind you to port your
> packages to Python 3.7 and 3.8.  According to our timeline [1], packages
> that are not ported by the end of the year are going to be last rited.
>  We would also like to switch to 3.8 in December.
>
> [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Python/Implementations#Implementation_support_timeline

So, has anybody given thought to publishing a list of packages that
still need to be updated, including their maintainers?

Or perhaps filing bugs?

Or is the plan to go ahead and watching nothing happen for the next
few months, then start masking hundreds of packages, and then watch
devs scramble to fix problems they didn't realize existed?

Just based on what is already happening, it seems like most devs don't
really care what versions of python are supported by their packages,
let alone the dependencies of their packages.  Expecting that to
change is just going to lead to a lot of frustration.

I don't think it is productive to just keep doing the same thing until
either the python team ragequits, or until we no longer have anything
that uses python left in the tree.

My guess is that a bit more communication will end up turning your
"enemies" into your allies, and ideally cut down on the amount of
masking/etc you have to do in the first place.  It certainly will be
less intrusive for users than having masks pop up and disappear.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1044 bytes --]

On Sat, 2020-08-01 at 06:15 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:29 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > I would like to take this as an opportunity to remind you to port your
> > packages to Python 3.7 and 3.8.  According to our timeline [1], packages
> > that are not ported by the end of the year are going to be last rited.
> >  We would also like to switch to 3.8 in December.
> > 
> > [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Python/Implementations#Implementation_support_timeline
> 
> So, has anybody given thought to publishing a list of packages that
> still need to be updated, including their maintainers?
> 
> Or perhaps filing bugs?
> 
> Or is the plan to go ahead and watching nothing happen for the next
> few months, then start masking hundreds of packages, and then watch
> devs scramble to fix problems they didn't realize existed?
> 

Or perhaps you'd like to help out instead of wasting your own
and everybody else's time on talking?

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Lars Wendler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1453 bytes --]

On Sat, 01 Aug 2020 12:19:13 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:

>On Sat, 2020-08-01 at 06:15 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:29 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
>> wrote:
>> > I would like to take this as an opportunity to remind you to port
>> > your packages to Python 3.7 and 3.8.  According to our timeline
>> > [1], packages that are not ported by the end of the year are going
>> > to be last rited. We would also like to switch to 3.8 in December.
>> > 
>> > [1]
>> > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Python/Implementations#Implementation_support_timeline
>> 
>> So, has anybody given thought to publishing a list of packages that
>> still need to be updated, including their maintainers?
>> 
>> Or perhaps filing bugs?
>> 
>> Or is the plan to go ahead and watching nothing happen for the next
>> few months, then start masking hundreds of packages, and then watch
>> devs scramble to fix problems they didn't realize existed?
>> 
>
>Or perhaps you'd like to help out instead of wasting your own
>and everybody else's time on talking?
>

Honestly... seeing such replies from you or knowing that you do not
hesitate to hit other devs with your full QA deputy power once they
dare to touch python packages is not motivating in any way to even
consider helping you.

Have a nice day...
-- 
Lars Wendler
Gentoo package maintainer
GPG: 21CC CF02 4586 0A07 ED93  9F68 498F E765 960E 9B39

[-- Attachment #2: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1040 bytes --]

On Sat, 2020-08-01 at 06:15 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:29 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > I would like to take this as an opportunity to remind you to port your
> > packages to Python 3.7 and 3.8.  According to our timeline [1], packages
> > that are not ported by the end of the year are going to be last rited.
> >  We would also like to switch to 3.8 in December.
> > 
> > [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Python/Implementations#Implementation_support_timeline
> 
> So, has anybody given thought to publishing a list of packages that
> still need to be updated, including their maintainers?
> 
> Or perhaps filing bugs?
> 

...and for the record -- because I realize it's *that hard* to check --
the bugs for last packages were filed almost 4 months ago.
 Surprisingly, this didn't make the problem magically go away, and I'm
pretty sure the maintainers have a very good excuse why their packages
must not be removed anyway.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Andreas Sturmlechner]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 464 bytes --]

On Samstag, 1. August 2020 12:15:18 CEST Rich Freeman wrote:
> Just based on what is already happening, it seems like most devs don't
> really care what versions of python are supported by their packages,
> let alone the dependencies of their packages.

That's the definition of an unmaintained package to me.

In case anyone still didn't know that list:
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/36-to-37.txt

It can be found on https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Aaron Bauman]

On August 1, 2020 6:25:09 AM EDT, Lars Wendler <polynomial-c@gentoo.org> wrote:
>On Sat, 01 Aug 2020 12:19:13 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 2020-08-01 at 06:15 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:29 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > I would like to take this as an opportunity to remind you to port
>>> > your packages to Python 3.7 and 3.8.  According to our timeline
>>> > [1], packages that are not ported by the end of the year are going
>>> > to be last rited. We would also like to switch to 3.8 in December.
>>> > 
>>> > [1]
>>> >
>https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Python/Implementations#Implementation_support_timeline
>>> 
>>> So, has anybody given thought to publishing a list of packages that
>>> still need to be updated, including their maintainers?
>>> 
>>> Or perhaps filing bugs?
>>> 
>>> Or is the plan to go ahead and watching nothing happen for the next
>>> few months, then start masking hundreds of packages, and then watch
>>> devs scramble to fix problems they didn't realize existed?
>>> 
>>
>>Or perhaps you'd like to help out instead of wasting your own
>>and everybody else's time on talking?
>>
>
>Honestly... seeing such replies from you or knowing that you do not
>hesitate to hit other devs with your full QA deputy power once they
>dare to touch python packages is not motivating in any way to even
>consider helping you.
>
>Have a nice day...

Lars, do you not recall the previous threads on this? The very same questions were answered about tooling. The very same requests were made and now Michal is providing a reasonable timeline that he would like other devs to help the Python team meet.

I see plenty of other devs and contributors touch Python packages with no problems... Is it just you maybe?

It doesn't seem *anything* will work with a few "high profile" devs in the community.

Provide tooling? Not good enough. Provide a reasonable timeline? Not good enough. Open bugs? We ignore them.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2802 bytes --]

On Sat, 2020-08-01 at 12:25 +0200, Lars Wendler wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Aug 2020 12:19:13 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2020-08-01 at 06:15 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:29 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > I would like to take this as an opportunity to remind you to port
> > > > your packages to Python 3.7 and 3.8.  According to our timeline
> > > > [1], packages that are not ported by the end of the year are going
> > > > to be last rited. We would also like to switch to 3.8 in December.
> > > > 
> > > > [1]
> > > > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Python/Implementations#Implementation_support_timeline
> > > 
> > > So, has anybody given thought to publishing a list of packages that
> > > still need to be updated, including their maintainers?
> > > 
> > > Or perhaps filing bugs?
> > > 
> > > Or is the plan to go ahead and watching nothing happen for the next
> > > few months, then start masking hundreds of packages, and then watch
> > > devs scramble to fix problems they didn't realize existed?
> > > 
> > 
> > Or perhaps you'd like to help out instead of wasting your own
> > and everybody else's time on talking?
> > 
> 
> Honestly... seeing such replies from you

I am sorry, I shouldn't have lost it.  However, I suppose you can
understand how I feel putting a lot of effort into it and hearing
someone insinuate stuff like this without even checking that I've filed
the bugs a few months ago.

>  or knowing that you do not
> hesitate to hit other devs with your full QA deputy power once they
> dare to touch python packages is not motivating in any way to even
> consider helping you.
> 

I would really appreciate if you didn't make such statements in public
without verifying your claims first.  I have never had any problems with
people either joining Python team or 'touching Python packages', as long
as they follow the same standards as people in Python team do.

For example, this means *testing* packages.  I don't see a problem with
people adding py3.8 to packages.  I do have a problem when people add
py3.8 when there are explicit test regressions with py3.8.

I might be wrong but I think it's a common sense and not something
specific to Python team that you're supposed not to break stuff.
 Especially when you don't maintain that stuff and the resulting fallout
is going to hit somebody else.

Furthermore, I have no clue what 'full QA deputy power' is.  I don't
know what's your source, and I can only guess what person are you
referring to.  However, there's no such thing as 'QA deputy power', QA
is making decisions as a team and I don't think there was any
disciplinary action taken recently.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 7:09 AM Andreas Sturmlechner <asturm@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Samstag, 1. August 2020 12:15:18 CEST Rich Freeman wrote:
> > Just based on what is already happening, it seems like most devs don't
> > really care what versions of python are supported by their packages,
> > let alone the dependencies of their packages.

So, to start, I'll apologize as my original reply was worded a bit strongly.

I'm happy to hear that bugs were filed this time.  Obviously a lot of
fairly active devs were taken unaware by a bunch of package masks only
a few days ago, so that isn't being done consistently, but if we're
doing it going forward that is great.

>
> That's the definition of an unmaintained package to me.

I didn't say they were ignoring bugs.  I said they didn't care about
python.  It is ok not to care about python, or C, or glibc, or
whatever.  They're a means to an end for most devs.

Some devs like to focus on a tool, and some devs focus on the software
that uses those tools.  There is nothing wrong with either.  The key
is communication, which didn't happen enough (IMO) the last time
around.  Communication is what lets two people who have different
interests pool their resources.  Yes, some will ignore
well-intentioned efforts to communicate, but most won't, so it is
usually worth the effort.

> In case anyone still didn't know that list:
> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/36-to-37.txt

So, if there are bugs filed then this list isn't all that important,
since maintainers will find out via bugs.  However, if you really want
lists like this to be directly useful to maintainers then you really
need to include maintainer names in them, because otherwise they're
very difficult to grep.  I doubt most devs know off the top of their
head the list of packages they maintain.

Somebody will no doubt link (again) repology or whatever.  Great, so
now we have two tables and we're asking humans to do a join on them.
Much better to just have the tools do this for us, and rather than
asking every dev to do it independently it makes more sense for the
first person that does it to just post the combined list.

In any case, this is moot if bugs were filed.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:36 AM Aaron Bauman <bman@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On August 1, 2020 6:25:09 AM EDT, Lars Wendler <polynomial-c@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> >Honestly... seeing such replies from you or knowing that you do not
> >hesitate to hit other devs with your full QA deputy power once they
> >dare to touch python packages is not motivating in any way to even
> >consider helping you.
> >
> Lars, do you not recall the previous threads on this? The very same questions were answered about tooling.

I'm sure everybody is tired of reading these threads over and over.
Simply saying that you answered these questions doesn't mean that
people will be satisfied with your answers.

> I see plenty of other devs and contributors touch Python packages with no problems... Is it just you maybe?

You probably aren't being driven up the wall by these 50-reply threads
because only one dev has a problem with the approach that has been
taken in the past.

> Provide tooling? Not good enough.

Well, not if you don't advertise the tooling, and the tools don't
output maintainer info so that maintainers can quickly determine if
they're impacted.

> Provide a reasonable timeline? Not good enough.

Nobody has complained about timelines as far as I'm aware.

> Open bugs? We ignore them.

I'm not aware of ANYBODY who has complained about action being taken
after a bug was assigned to them.

Yes, some people ignore bugs.  They don't get much sympathy.  If you
file a bug and somebody ignores it for months, and then you depclean
their package, nobody is going to take their side.

The complaints you are getting are from devs who find out about a
problem with their package for the first time from a package mask,
perhaps due to a dependency/etc.

In any case, it sounds like we're now filing bugs, so hopefully we'll
see fewer problems like this the next time around.  Really, if you're
filing bugs I'd suggest leading with that as it will get you a LOT
more support than just pointing out the previous threads that nobody
seems to think were resolved but you.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Aaron Bauman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1101 bytes --]

On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 02:07:59PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:36 AM Aaron Bauman <bman@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > On August 1, 2020 6:25:09 AM EDT, Lars Wendler <polynomial-c@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >Honestly... seeing such replies from you or knowing that you do not
> > >hesitate to hit other devs with your full QA deputy power once they
> > >dare to touch python packages is not motivating in any way to even
> > >consider helping you.
> > >
> > Lars, do you not recall the previous threads on this? The very same questions were answered about tooling.
> 
> I'm sure everybody is tired of reading these threads over and over.
> Simply saying that you answered these questions doesn't mean that
> people will be satisfied with your answers.
> 
> Well, not if you don't advertise the tooling, and the tools don't
> output maintainer info so that maintainers can quickly determine if
> they're impacted.
>

Then people should be more explicit or contribute changes. These are
global issues not just one projects problem.

-- 
Cheers,
Aaron

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] IPython 7.17 drops Python 3.6 support AKA upgrade reminder

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 735 bytes --]

On Sat, 2020-08-01 at 09:29 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> The most recent release of IPython removes support for Python 3.6.
>  Unless I'm mistaken, this is the first very high profile package
> to become 3.7+ only.  Please expect a major slay of Python 3.6 support
> in its reverse dependencies today.  That is, when I finish the large
> part of my today's TODO called 'immediate bumps'.

I'd like to note that I won't do it after all.  The number of (deep)
revdeps is too great, and given that py3.6 is no longer in default
PYTHON_TARGETS this shouldn't impact our users much.  Instead, we'll
probably be keeping 3.6 in PYTHON_COMPAT as long as possible until
the final deadline.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]