Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost> writes: > Am Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 06:40:21PM -0400 schrieb Greg Troxel: >> >> Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost> writes: >> >> > Am Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 08:11:13AM -0400 schrieb Greg Troxel: >> >> Does anyone actually use python37 from pkgsrc (who is running >> >> pkgsrc-current, or who is running 2022Q3 and who regularly updates to >> >> new quarterly releases)*? Please speak up and explain why. (Or send >> >> me text to post anonymously if you don't want to admit it public.) >> > >> > Yes, I do. It is one of the upgrade paths for complex Python 2.7 >> > programs... >> >> You mean that you port things from 2.7 to 3.7, and then from 3.7 to >> 3.11? >> >> To do that, do you need >> >> python3.7 in wip >> >> python3.7 in pkgsrc, but no python-depending packages for 37 >> >> python3.7 in pkgsrc, with 37 packages not built unless added? >> >> also some python-depending packages >> >> or really: if we removed it anyway, how much extra work would that >> impose on you? (to be compared to the work on the part of others to >> deal with the breakage we have now) > > Yes, I would have to fork a lot of packages further increasing the pain. Or you could just do your 2 porting steps with 2022Q3, and then move to HEAD. > So far I haven't seen that many cases of difficult to fix breakage... The point is that the breakage is showing up and not getting fixed, so it is de facto too hard, relative to the effort that is being applied. We need a get-well plan from that. We'll see if anybody else speaks up, or if it's only you that wants to port (something) from 2.7->3.7->3.11. The week is young :-)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature