Re: Python2 removal: package with low-popcon reverse dependencies
On 10/11/19 9:26 PM, Christian Kastner wrote:
> On 11.10.19 19:47, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 11.10.19 18:27, Christian Kastner wrote:
>>> This would nevertheless be a case for the "py2keep", right?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> #933348 is another bug for removed packages (mopidy-scrobler). Do you
>> really want to keep that?
>
> Not at all, I'd actually prefer just dropping the Python2 version of
> python-cachetools. However, this breaks things, and it wasn't entirely
> clear to me much breakage is acceptable.
It's becoming increasingly clear to me that, at some point, we will need
to just ignore the breakage. Bust this needs to be discussed here first.
Maybe the better way to fix the situation is to increase the severity of
the py2 removal bug to serious, so we leave a chance to the maintainer
to take care of the package before the autorm. See the other thread I've
just started about this.
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Reply to: