On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 08:27:07AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2015-01-18 at 14:35 -0700, Pete Travis wrote: > > On 12/08/2014 09:47 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 09:10:59AM -0700, Pete Travis wrote: > > >> On Dec 8, 2014 8:51 AM, "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> > > >> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 04:45:12PM -0700, Pete Travis wrote: > > >>>> python-dateutil is old[0]. Fedora is carrying version 1.5, and > > upstream > > >>>> is up to 2.3 . If you're receiving this mail directly, you are a > > >>>> maintainer of a package that depends on python-dateutil, and we need > > >>>> your help. > > >>> It seems that calibre is fine with the new version. I wanted to update > > >>> pyton-dateutil to check if calibre works, and it seems that I > > >>> installed python-dateutil-2.3 with pip --user couple of months ago and > > >>> calibre didn't seem to mind. There's some dateutil usage in the > > installer, > > >>> which I didn't test but which we probably don't care about. > > >>> https://github.com/dateutil/dateutil/blob/master/NEWS also doesn't seem > > >>> scary. > > >>> > > >>> So I think it's fine it python-dateutil is updated as a calibre dep. > > >>> > > >>> Zbyszek > > >> > > >> Great, thanks for responding. I'm a *light* calibre user, but I'd be > > >> happy to help test with a newer dateutil when it becomes available if > > >> that's the direction you are going. > > > You can just install the python-dateutil-2.* package and test away ;) > > > > > > Looking at the list and your annoucement mail again, I wonder if it > > > might be better to bump python-dateutil to 2.2 again as soon as the > > > updated python-dateutil15 is available, and simply modify packages > > > which either explicitly depend on dateutil < 2 or exhibit problems to > > > depend on python-dateutil15. Proven packagers can do that trivially if > > > necessary. Otherwise this could drag on for months. > > > > > > fedocal and python-django-tastypie are the only packages which > > > explicitly require python-dateutil < 2. If you wish, I can volunteer > > > file bugs to change the dependency for F21 and rawhide for those two > > > packages and do it myself after a week if the maintainers don't > > > respond or are fine with the change (got to use those provenpackager > > > privs for something :)). > > > > > > Zbyszek > > > > Okay, I finally have things in motion here.... python-dateutil15 in > > rawhide is usable as described and an update for F21 will be available > > soon. Provenpackage at will :) > > > > > > Please, *DO NOT* push incompatible updates to Fedora 21. This is not > acceptable. Python-dateutil 2.x is incompatible with nearly all packages > that use 1.5. Treat this like you would a SOName bump in a C package. That's not quite true. dateutil was py2 only up to 1.5, then they released 2.0 announcing it would be py3 only which they later changed back so that the 2.2+ (maybe even 2.1) versions are both compatible with py2 and py3. So the latest version of python-dateutil are pretty much compatible with all packages that use/used 1.5. I have not checked completely but for all the programs which I have that relies on dateutil the API didn't change. So, while it should be handled carefully, I do not consider it to be 'incompatible with nearly all packages that use 1.5'. Pierre
Attachment:
pgpllMJR67nri.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
