python-dateutil update

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 08:27:07AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, 2015-01-18 at 14:35 -0700, Pete Travis wrote:
> > On 12/08/2014 09:47 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 09:10:59AM -0700, Pete Travis wrote:
> > >> On Dec 8, 2014 8:51 AM, "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" <zbyszek at in.waw.pl>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 04:45:12PM -0700, Pete Travis wrote:
> > >>>> python-dateutil is old[0].  Fedora is carrying version 1.5, and
> > upstream
> > >>>> is up to 2.3 .  If you're receiving this mail directly, you are a
> > >>>> maintainer of  a package that depends on python-dateutil, and we need
> > >>>> your help.
> > >>> It seems that calibre is fine with the new version. I wanted to update
> > >>> pyton-dateutil to check if calibre works, and it seems that I
> > >>> installed python-dateutil-2.3 with pip --user couple of months ago and
> > >>> calibre didn't seem to mind. There's some dateutil usage in the
> > installer,
> > >>> which I didn't test but which we probably don't care about.
> > >>> https://github.com/dateutil/dateutil/blob/master/NEWS also doesn't seem
> > >>> scary.
> > >>>
> > >>> So I think it's fine it python-dateutil is updated as a calibre dep.
> > >>>
> > >>> Zbyszek
> > >>
> > >> Great, thanks for responding.   I'm a *light* calibre user, but I'd be
> > >> happy to help test with a newer dateutil when it becomes available if
> > >> that's the direction you are going.
> > > You can just install the python-dateutil-2.* package and test away ;)
> > >
> > > Looking at the list and your annoucement mail again, I wonder if it
> > > might be better to bump python-dateutil to 2.2 again as soon as the
> > > updated python-dateutil15 is available, and simply modify packages
> > > which either explicitly depend on dateutil < 2 or exhibit problems to
> > > depend on python-dateutil15. Proven packagers can do that trivially if
> > > necessary. Otherwise this could drag on for months.
> > >
> > > fedocal and python-django-tastypie are the only packages which
> > > explicitly require python-dateutil < 2. If you wish, I can volunteer
> > > file bugs to change the dependency for F21 and rawhide for those two
> > > packages and do it myself after a week if the maintainers don't
> > > respond or are fine with the change (got to use those provenpackager
> > > privs for something :)).
> > >
> > > Zbyszek
> > 
> > Okay, I finally have things in motion here.... python-dateutil15 in
> > rawhide is usable as described and an update for F21 will be available
> > soon. Provenpackage at will :)
> > 
> > 
> 
> Please, *DO NOT* push incompatible updates to Fedora 21. This is not
> acceptable. Python-dateutil 2.x is incompatible with nearly all packages
> that use 1.5. Treat this like you would a SOName bump in a C package.

That's not quite true.
dateutil was py2 only up to 1.5, then they released 2.0 announcing it would be
py3 only which they later changed back so that the 2.2+ (maybe even 2.1)
versions are both compatible with py2 and py3.
So the latest version of python-dateutil are pretty much compatible with all
packages that use/used 1.5. I have not checked completely but for all
the programs which I have that relies on dateutil the API didn't change.

So, while it should be handled carefully, I do not consider it to be
'incompatible with nearly all packages that use 1.5'.


Pierre
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150119/d7673cb6/attachment.sig>