Re: Python 3.11 for bookworm?
thoughts from a concerned maintainer
On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:24 PM Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
> while we have not an 100% agreement to go ahead, I think we should aim for 3.11.
>
> The following steps would be:
>
> - accept the current python3-defaults into
> testing (adding 3.11 as supported)
> - ask for a transition slot to upload (see #1026825)
> python3-defaults with 3.11 as the default
> - start the no-change NMUs
> - file bug reports.
> - fix issues
> - let 3.11 as default migrate to testing.
>
> If things don't go as planned, we could default back to 3.10. Mostly that would
> be no-change uploads, however in the case of a 3.11 specific fix that doesn't
> work for 3.10, these fixes would need reverting. I have no idea who many of
> these we will introduce with this transition.
>
> Also we might want to ask for some freeze exceptions for third party libraries,
> that we can't fix before the feature freeze, unfortunately at this point we
> cannot say which and how many packages would be affected.
from expressions like
* "If things don't go as planned"
* "no idea who many of these we will introduce with this transition."
* "cannot say which and how many packages would be affected"
it seems this email advocates for a "let's wing it"[1] type of transition.
[1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wing_it
It appears there has been little work in preparing the work to
introduce python3.11 from its maintainer, instead that works has been
pushed downstream to maintainers.
if we continue with the plan as described above, several python
libraries/applications maintainers will be left with the short end of
the stick and deal with an unknown amount of issues (upstream fixes
not available, not ready and or/ not released, rushed, etc) with less
than a month from the beginning of the transition freeze[2]
[2] https://release.debian.org/bullseye/freeze_policy.html
[2] also highlights at the very beginning "Plan your changes for
bullseye", this change appears as if it was not planned and we should
be skeptical to proceed without further (and in advance) understanding
of the impact it may have on Bullseye.
Regards,
--
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
Twitter: https://twitter.com/sandrotosi
Reply to: