https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1648728 --- Comment #11 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Petr Viktorin from comment #10) > (In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #9) > > Sure, but in either case once we decide what upstream to follow, we'll have > > to request upstreams of whatever packages to switch to it. > > Yes. > If one is clearly better than the other, it shouldn't be an issue, right? I hope not, but one can't say with upstreams XD Here's what progressbar2 upstream said: https://github.com/WoLpH/python-progressbar/issues/177#issuecomment-438706012 "Hi Ankur, It seems the original module has gotten at least a bit of a revival, but I still see several issues going all the way back to 2010 (such as this one: niltonvolpato/python-progressbar#8 (comment)) so I'm inclined to say it's still not receiving all that much love. Throughout the development I've always taken care to make the interface backwards compatible so it won't cause any issues for people that switch between the libraries. Since the original project didn't have any tests it's hard to know for certain, but I don't see any issues when running the original project examples.py script." So: - do we agree progressbar2 is more active and a better candidate? - if we do, * should we use the progressbar2 upstream in Fedora's python-progressbar package: ** should we test to see if the packages that depend on the older version function properly with the new one without requiring any changes (that'd be awesome)? *** If they do, can we notify upstreams and request them to work against progressbar2 in the future? *** if they do not, can we request their upstreams to migrate? ** does this require some sort of change notification (or simply an e-mail to -devel) > > > Would it be possible to ask the python-progressbar upstream to retire it, > > and add a notice requesting people to move to the newer one, which appears > > to have more features and is better maintained? > > IMO it would be better to merge with the fork, since "progressbar" is > clearly a better name than "progressbar2". > This would be brilliant too---we could work on this once the aforementioned points are taken care of? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-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/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
