On 13 February 2017 at 15:36, Tomas Tomecek <ttomecek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hello,
am planning to update package python-docker-py from 1.x series to 2.x series in
rawhide. The update should happen rather soon, so we're sure it gets to F26 (and
hence we can have docker-compose 1.11 in F26). The reason this is important is
that 2.x is not backwards compatible with 1.x. Here is a list of breaking
changes:
https://docker-py.readthedocs.io/en/stable/change-log.html#breaking-changes
Here is a list of affected packages:
$ dnf repoquery --whatrequires \*docker-py
atomic-0:1.15.2-2.fc26.x86_64
docker-compose-0:1.9.0-3.fc26.noarch
flr-0:0.0.1-1.fc26.noarch
python-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
python-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
python2-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
python3-atomic-reactor-0:1.6.19-5.fc26.noarch
python3-docker-squash-0:1.0.5-3.fc26.noarch
python3-dockerpty-0:0.4.1-4.fc26.noarch
python3-sen-0:0.5.0-1.fc26.noarch
Maintainers of these packages, shall I help you with porting to docker-py-2?
(This is the third time I'm trying to send this e-mail, this time without CCs;
sorry if spamming)
Since I'm resending, I already managed to rebase the package and all the changes
are in dist-git. Will submit a build once we are sure the update doesn't break
anything.
Since this is a breaking change in the module and upstream have
formally renamed from python-docker-py to python-docker might I
suggest that it is more appropriate to issue a fresh package review
for python-docker (which can then in due course perhaps obsolete
python-docker-py or at least just retire it without obsoleting) would
be more appropriate?
This will break the scripts of anyone using the docker python module
after all ...
Related to this are you aware of any plans to rebase from 1.9.0 in RHEL extras?