Re: EPEL: Python 3.4 will be EOL in March 2019

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

 



On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 at 13:24, Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 13.8.2018 11:49, Larry Hastings wrote on python-dev@xxxxxxxxxx:
>  > We of the core dev community commit to supporting Python releases for
>  > five years.  Releases get eighteen months of active bug fixes, followed
>  > by three and a half years of security fixes.  Python 3.4 turns 5 next
>  > March--at which point we'll stop supporting it, and I'll retire as 3.4
>  > release manager.
>  >
>  > My plan is to make one final release on or around its fifth birthday
>  > containing the last round of security fixes.  That's about seven
>  > months from now.
>
> See also PEP 429 -- Python 3.4 Release Schedule [0].
>
> We have python34 and python36 in EPEL7. python34 being the "main" one
> and python36 the "other" one. The original plan [1] was that once the
> ecosystem is adapted well enough, we can switch what "main" and "other"
> is and eventually drop python34, creating room for maybe another python3
> release to be the "other" next (python38 maybe?). Originally this was
> supposed to happen for each release [2], but this was later abandoned
> due to lack of manpower.
>
> Do we want to ever switch "main" with "other"? The problem here is:
>
> $ dnf repoquery --repo=epel7 --whatrequires 'python(abi) = 3.4' |
> pkgname | sort | uniq | wc -l
> 243
>
> $ dnf repoquery --repo=epel7 --whatrequires 'python(abi) = 3.6' |
> pkgname | sort | uniq | wc -l
> 15
>
> The original idea is that all packages would have the python3_other
> macros in them [2] and all we need is rebuild everything in proper
> order, maybe with some bootstrapping. However that never happened and
> most of the packages I've seen lack the python3_other bits (no
> statistics, just my impression).
>
> Is this something we want? If so, are the packagers willing to adapt
> their packages (as much as I'd like to do this, I lack the resources to
> hack on 228 packages)?
>
> The Python Maint team in Red Hat is here to help. However the drive
> would need to come from the EPEL community, as now we are only guessing
> what are the needs here.

Understood. What are the groups initial recommendations for us to
follow? I agree we need to have this done this fall/winter. [AKA I
would like to say python34 will be removed by whatever EL7.x release
comes out next.]


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/MSHJYCMZVCJVYILPJGRU5POXYJPIREZE/




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora QA]     [Fedora Triage]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Apps]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Maemo Users]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux