[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#892304: lintian: Warn about "old" X-Python3-Version fields?



Hello,

On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 03:53:31PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Mar 2018 02:07:36 +0000 Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org> wrote:
> > Package: lintian
> > Version: 2.5.77
> > Severity: wishlist
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Should we warn about "old" X-Python3-Version fields? For example, I
> > just saw a new package from a sponsee with:
> > 
> >   X-Python3-Version: >= 3.2
> > 
> > This seems a little silly given that 3.2 is only in wheezy, jessie has
> > 3.4 and stretch has 3.5.
> >

I remember this ;-)  Thanks for mentioning this bug in
#debian-python.  I followed
https://wiki.debian.org/Python/LibraryStyleGuide#Python_versions and
it would seem it also needs to be updated.
 
> > If the idea is fundamentally sound, we could even avoid most of the
> > "What versions should we I: or P: at..." bikeshedding by having an
> > "ancient" and "old" tags with differing severities.  :)
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> 
> I also applies to X-Python-Version (even more so - I didn't check if this is 
> already covered in another test).
> 
> Here's a rule of thumb I would suggest:
> 
> old: =< lowest version supported in stable (for backports)
> ancient: =< lowest version supported in oldstable (for sloppy backports)
> 
> Currently that would be:
> 
> Python:
> 
> old: Presence of any X-Python-Version as there's only Python2.7 in stable
> ancient: Same.  Even though oldstable shipped the python2.6 interpreter, it 
> was not a supported version for module building.
> 
> Python3:
> 
> old: X-Python3-Version: >= 3.5
> ancient: X-Python3-Version: >= 3.4
> 
> Backport no longer remains open for LTS, so there's no need to consider 
> backports to oldoldstable.

Should articles in the wiki be updated before or after lintian?

Cheers,
Nicholas

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: