On Màrt 23, 2018 aig 03:43:13f +0000, Toshio Kuratomi sgrìobh:
Depends on what the groups of packagers want... A macro for Django
definitely have given an easy option for packagers to take advantage of.
Otoh, how far in advance was the Django removal telegraphed and how much
chance was there that a new maintainer would pick it up? It doesn't do as
much good for a package that is going to definitely drop support in the
very next release as it does for a package that is going to drop support
two releases from now, maybe, unless someone decides to pick it up, even at
the last minute, perhaps only after they realize it's been removed from the
Why do we want to avoid *breaking* everything at once? I can see us
wanting to keep things *working* as long as it makes sense to the set of
packagers that care (which I think adding the macro would aid in) but it
doesn't feel like actively designing things to break a little at a time is
helpful to anyone. Users can't count on things working from release to
release and packagers have to do more work to keep the pieces they care
I, for one, am glad to drop python2 support in everything I maintain.
In fact, I have already started doing so with packages I maintain that
do not have any dependencies that I can see on the python2 side.