[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#683053: marked as done (unblock: python2.7/2.7.3-2)

Your message dated Tue, 8 Jan 2013 23:06:22 +0100
with message-id <20130108220622.GB5676@radis.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#683053: unblock: python2.7/2.7.3-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #683053,
regarding unblock: python2.7/2.7.3-2
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
683053: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683053
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock

Please unblock package python2.7

On balance, I think it's better to accept the newer python2.7 than not.  I'm
finally motivated to file this bug (instead of randomly hoping jcristau will
feel motivated to do it) because of an RC issue that came up in Ubuntu today
and affects Wheezy, but not Unstable in Debian (683050).

As far as I know, the only issue that's come up with the 2.7.3-2 is the
urlparse module where they simplified it and dropped some options which gave
some packages a bit of trouble.  It appears jwilk did a systematic sweep for
packages that were affected by this (I say it seems because I haven't caught
him online recently to ask, but everywhere I found the issue, he'd already
filed a bug).

All of these except three, because they weren't on their own RC (in some
cases the change really broke packages, in others the impact was less so).

Still open are #682148, #682150, and #679454.  The first two are not RC and I
didn't NMU gwibber (the last one) because it seems pretty broken in its
current state and the maintainers said they're preparing a new upstream that
already has this fixed.  On a related note, #682603 is an unblock for one of
these fixes that's waiting for approval.

In addition to thinking releasing with the newer python2.7 udpate is a good
idea, that would also unblock python-defaults (unblock pending as #682906).
As I mentioned there, I think we definitely want those changes in.

My recommendation is that you unblock python2.7, but increase the age
requirement to 30 days (it's at 14 righ now) and that you also unblock
linkchecker (#682603) and I'll NMU pegasus-wm, createrepo, and gwibber, file
fore unblocks, etc.  In each case the diff is very compact (similar to #682603
in scope).  With python2.7 having two weeks to go, this was all the fixed
packages can migrate with or before python2.7 so it can be a smooth switch
(the fixed packages work fine with either the python2.7 in wheezy or unstable
there's no need to tightly coordinate things.

unblock python2.7/2.7.3-2

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 03:39:51 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:

> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
> 
> Please unblock package python2.7
> 
Unblocked 2.7.3-6.

Cheers,
Julien

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: