[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Killing python2 v3...v4...v5

[Morten Linderud]

On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 08:09:44PM +0100, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
> On 15/03/2021 19.10, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > Yo!
> > 
> > As people know python2 has been unsupported for a year and we current have ~170
> > python2 packages in our repositories. Currently the removal has been fairly slow
> > and done a bit ad-hoc. There has been a todo list but the follow up to that has
> > not really been great and I think it's reasonable for us to try and fix the
> > remaining packages to the best of our abilities.
> > 
> > Thus I'm proposing a game plan!
> > 
> > 1) Todo list for removal of all python2 checkdepends in packages
> > 2) Remove free python2 packages 
> > 3) Remove packages with python3 equivalents
> > 4) Remove unported and unsupported packages depending on python2
> > 
> > Clearly this is ambitious and there are going to be exceptions, but it would be
> > great to have most of this work done within the next couple of months.
> > 
> > The exceptions are largely going to be anything still using python2 for their
> > build system dependencies. This is a fine compromise as this should leave us
> > with a minimal set of packages to take care of.
> > 
> > Rest of the problematic packages can be found on a handy list with what fedora
> > is working on: https://fedora.portingdb.xyz/
> > 
> > If there are no objections I'll start preparing the needed todo lists and figure
> > out the uneeded python2 packages. Should probably update the long-standing
> > python2 removal todo as well.
> > 
> > https://archlinux.org/todo/conversion-of-programs-that-use-python-2-to-python-3/
> > 
> > 
> > Cheers!
> > 
> 
> Shouldn't this proposal go through the recently established RFC process?

I'll be damned if we need to use RFCs to hash out implementation details of the
established decision to "remove python2 within some reasonable timeframe".

    "RFCs are used for proposing "substantial" changes. The meaning of
    "substantial" is subjective, but a good start would be anything that
    benefits from design discussion."

https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs

-- 
Morten Linderud
PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20210315/cfc49737/attachment.sig>