brainstorming for UDS-N - Package Selection and Defaults

[Barry Warsaw]

On Oct 07, 2010, at 03:02 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:

>On 04.10.2010 01:33, Scott Kitterman wrote:

>> I'd like to see Python 2.7 default when the archive opens and then
>> assess near feature freeze if we can drop 2.6 support or not.
>
>I don't think this is a good idea to start with it as the new
>default.

I'm afraid that if we don't start with it as the default early in the cycle,
it won't happen for Natty.  OTOH, if we make it the default early, I think we
can more effectively identify and fix lots of ftbfs and .py incompatibilities
before it affects a large number of users.

In either case (make it the default now or wait) we do need criteria for
deciding whether and when to make a change later in the cycle.  IOW,

* If we make 2.7 the default asap, what criteria would we use to revert to 2.6
  as the default, and when would we have to make that decision by?  Possibly:
  any build or installation failures in main (over and above similar failure
  for 2.6) by the first beta.

* If we keep 2.6 the default, what criteria would we use to make 2.7 the
  default and when would we have to make that by?  Possibly: all main packages
  build and install successfully by last alpha.

>For the last release in the 2.x series it's important to
>finally get our robust-python-packaging spec implemented. that means:
>
>  - no symlinking in configure scripts

robust-python-packaging asks whether we should backport PEP 3147 to Python 2,
and we decided we were not going to do that.  Ah, I think you mean this bullet
item:

* Investigate amount of work to adopt dh_python2 to eliminate symlinks: TODO

>  - all .py files distributed in the package, not created at configure
> time

Do you mean .pyc files in the package?  Aren't the .py files already in the
package?  Or do you mean running 2to3 at build time for Python 3 compatible
packages?

>  - use of a unique site directory.

This is not currently in the spec.

>we should start with 2.7 as supported version.

This should be trivial to do.  We just have to land my branches.  I think
Scott was going to do this in Debian first.

>> I'd like to see us support Python3 3.1 and 3.2 with a decision for
>> what's default near feature freeze.
>
>I plan to add the 3.2rc1 to the supported versions (planned for Dec
>12), and make 3.2 the default after Jan 16 (the planned 3.2 release).

+1

Just for the record, here is the current Natty spec for
robust-python-packaging:

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-foundations-n-robust-python-packaging

Note that foundations-m-python-cx-freeze is obsolete; we're not going to do
it.

Looking at this spec, plus the one from Maverick, and the original Lucid spec,
we have the following items that are marked TODO.  Please respond if you think
items need to be added, removed, or changed and I will update the Natty spec.

(Maverick spec):

* Update dh_python to support versioned .so files: TODO
* Run 2to3 at build time: TODO
* Investigate amount of work to adopt dh_python2 to eliminate symlinks: TODO
* Add an auto-upgrade test profile that installs all/most of python (including
  universe) and tried to upgrade it and import all modules from 2.6, 2.7: TODO 
* Keep source packages shared b/w 2 and 3 but split if upstream stops shipping
  py2 version: TODO

(Lucid spec):

* make python-central use "include-links" as default (e.g. in dh_pycentral):
  TODO 
* rebuild all python-central packages in a PPA for testing: TODO
* use that PPA and do a test-upgrade (with python-regression test from the
  lts-upgrades spec): TODO
* ensure python applications keep working between --unpack and --configure:
  TODO
* regression testing for the python2.5 -> python2.6 upgrade (hardy->lucid):
  TODO
* clarify what supported, old-versions and unsupported means in
  /usr/share/python/debian_defaults: TODO
* propose to Debian a way forward to resolve the python-central/python-support
  situation: TODO

-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20101007/71e442a3/attachment-0001.pgp