Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok?
On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 10:16 +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
> Hi Ghis,
>
> On 16.10.18 08:30, ghisvail@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-10-15 at 22:44 +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I am keeping me busy packaging the Orange machine learning
> > > library
> > > that
> > > seems nice (https://orange.biolab.si/#Orange-Features). Now, the
> > > test
> > > routines demand a matplotlib.pyplot module that is not in version
> > > 2
> > > that
> > > we feature. Version 3 is the current stable release.
> > Ack. Thank you for explaining the context.
> >
> > > Now, I am tempted to create a package matplotlib3 instead of
> > > forcing
> > > everyone to update from this long term release (see
> > > https://matplotlib.org/).
> > >
> > > Any opinions from your sides?
> > How is that going to work without creating package conflicts?
> >
> > I suppose the main module is still named "matplotlib" not
> > "matplotlib3" in version 3 onwards? So using python3-matplotlib3
> > would
> > be a breach of policy.
> Yes. We would need to freely interpret that policy in analogy to
> Debian
> libraries e.g. for C/C++ or Java.
I am not quite sure which interpretation you are refering to in this
case. Back to the Debian Python policy, the wording in section 2.2 uses
"should" instead of "must", so there is room for discussion in
exceptional circumstances I guess.
> > Let me ask you this: where is the rush to package this machine
> > learning
> > library? Could it wait after the Buster release cycle, where we
> > might
> > be in a more comfortable position to upgrade matplotlib?
>
> The short answer is yes.
There you go.
> The almost as short one is "Conda has it already, use that".
Even better. Or use a virtual environment. Which the majority of
developers do (one or the other).
> The slightly longer answer is that I don't think
> that this is the right thing for Debian to do. We are then shipping
> an
> old version of matplotlib, i.e. oldstable, with a new release of our
> distribution.
"Old" indeed, but still actively maintained upstream.
> I do also think that that long-term support version 2 of
> matplotlib should remain in our distribution. So we would need to
> find a
> way to support two versions for the same distribution.
I'll ask the same question again: besides your ITP for Orange, is there
anything *already* in the archive in desparate need for an upgrade of
matplotlib to its new major release?
If not, figuring out a way to support both versions can be postponed to
the next release cycle, imo. I don't see where the rush would be. There
is already enough on our plates as far as RC bugs are concerned.
I have already spoken quite a bit, so I'll let others in the team give
their opinions.
Cheers,
Ghis
Reply to: