public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] unsanctioned python 2.7 crusade
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2020 23:17:19 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f21798e5621fd26603fb55306023a0dcd012b2f6.camel@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15005ba1-1a1b-5d71-dbe3-7834b79ee733@gentoo.org>

On Sun, 2020-01-12 at 17:07 -0500, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> On 12/5/2019 09:24, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 8:59 AM Jason A. Donenfeld <zx2c4@gentoo.org
> > > 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.
> > 
> 
> I'm late to the party as usual.  Seems upstream plans a final 2.7.18
> security update in April of 2020, then they will consider the 2.7
> branch
> EOL.  They say most of these updates were done in 2019, and so are
> still
> technically sticking to their mantra of no more updates after
> 01/01/2020.
> 
> PEP 373 covers this:
> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0373/#release-schedule
> 
> """
> Planned future release dates:
> 
>     2.7.18 code freeze January, 2020
>     2.7.18 release candidate early April, 2020
>     2.7.18 mid-April, 2020
> """
> 
> IMHO, I think we should retain 2.7.x compatibility for 1 year AFTER
> the
> release of 2.7.18.  This provides some time for people to transition
> systems
> off of 2.7-dependent packages.
> 
> It might be worthwhile to treat the removal of Python-2.7 from the
> tree in
> the same manner as an EAPI deprecation and removal, given how
> ingrained it
> is due to its longevity.  That will minimize the whiplash-effect of
> emerge
> complaining about slot conflicts and dependency conflicts.  Like I
> just ran
> into w/ setuptools-45.0.0.0's release.
> 

Thanks for volunteering to help us manage the ton of packages that have
dropped py2 in the mean time. I wasn't aware you were part of the
python team, but I must have been mistaken!



  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-12 22:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-05 13:42 [gentoo-dev] unsanctioned python 2.7 crusade Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-05 13:55 ` Rich Freeman
2019-12-05 13:59   ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-05 14:24     ` Rich Freeman
2019-12-05 14:34       ` William Breathitt Gray
2019-12-05 14:40         ` Aaron Bauman
2019-12-06  6:53           ` Kent Fredric
2020-01-12 22:07       ` Joshua Kinard
2020-01-12 22:17         ` David Seifert [this message]
2020-01-12 22:29           ` Joshua Kinard
2020-01-12 22:32         ` Andreas Sturmlechner
2020-01-12 22:43           ` Joshua Kinard
2020-01-12 22:46             ` David Seifert
2020-01-12 22:55               ` Joshua Kinard
2020-01-12 23:17                 ` David Seifert
2020-01-13  0:21                   ` William Hubbs
2020-01-13  0:44                     ` Joshua Kinard
2020-01-13  7:22                       ` Andreas Sturmlechner
2020-01-13  6:52         ` Michał Górny
2020-01-14  6:45           ` Joshua Kinard
2019-12-05 20:31     ` David Seifert
2019-12-05 20:56       ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-12-05 22:23         ` David Seifert
2019-12-05 22:41           ` Rich Freeman
2019-12-06  8:11           ` Mart Raudsepp
2019-12-06 10:48             ` David Seifert
2019-12-06 13:06             ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-12-06 13:52               ` Rich Freeman
2019-12-06 15:48                 ` Mike Gilbert
2019-12-06 16:12                   ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-12-06 16:44                     ` Mike Gilbert
2019-12-06 19:47                       ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-12-06 20:10                         ` Andreas Sturmlechner
2019-12-06 20:28                           ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-12-08 10:28                             ` Alexis Ballier
2019-12-06 20:30                           ` Michael 'veremitz' Everitt
2019-12-07  8:04                           ` Kent Fredric
2019-12-06 16:35               ` Mart Raudsepp
2019-12-06 16:43                 ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-12-05 14:36 ` Aaron Bauman
2019-12-05 16:03 ` Andreas K. Huettel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=f21798e5621fd26603fb55306023a0dcd012b2f6.camel@gentoo.org \
    --to=soap@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox