setuptools tracker
We are still hosting a roundup installation for setuptools, at http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/. Is this still needed? If not: what should we do with it? Regards, Martin
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 4:55 AM, "Martin v. Löwis"
We are still hosting a roundup installation for setuptools, at http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/.
Is this still needed? If not: what should we do with it?
I think probably the remaining issues need to be moved to Bitbucket (unless they're already addressed in later setuptools versions), and the tracker closed. At this point, I think it's safe to say that the 0.6 line isn't getting any more changes; persons and organizations using older versions of Python will have to take 0.6 as it is, or upgrade.
Am 23.03.14 18:30, schrieb PJ Eby:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 4:55 AM, "Martin v. Löwis"
mailto:martin@v.loewis.de> wrote: We are still hosting a roundup installation for setuptools, at http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/.
Is this still needed? If not: what should we do with it?
I think probably the remaining issues need to be moved to Bitbucket (unless they're already addressed in later setuptools versions), and the tracker closed. At this point, I think it's safe to say that the 0.6 line isn't getting any more changes; persons and organizations using older versions of Python will have to take 0.6 as it is, or upgrade.
Would you volunteer to move them? Alternatively, I could close them all with an automatic message saying that they should re-report them if the issue still exists. Regards, Martin
I think it would be a good idea to check with Jason and other PyPA
volunteers to see if there is anyone else who can handle the moves. I'd
prefer we didn't lose the history, since my comments on those issues (and
the closed ones, too) often contain key information about use cases and
design decisions that may not be available elsewhere, even from my memory.
;-) But, since I'm no longer in the lead on development, I think it would
be better for someone closer to the future of things to do the prioritizing
of what, if anything, to transfer as an issue or keep as documentation.
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 2:00 PM, "Martin v. Löwis"
Am 23.03.14 18:30, schrieb PJ Eby:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 4:55 AM, "Martin v. Löwis"
mailto:martin@v.loewis.de> wrote: We are still hosting a roundup installation for setuptools, at http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/.
Is this still needed? If not: what should we do with it?
I think probably the remaining issues need to be moved to Bitbucket (unless they're already addressed in later setuptools versions), and the tracker closed. At this point, I think it's safe to say that the 0.6 line isn't getting any more changes; persons and organizations using older versions of Python will have to take 0.6 as it is, or upgrade.
Would you volunteer to move them? Alternatively, I could close them all with an automatic message saying that they should re-report them if the issue still exists.
Regards, Martin
Am 24.03.14 01:33, schrieb PJ Eby:
I think it would be a good idea to check with Jason and other PyPA volunteers to see if there is anyone else who can handle the moves. I'd prefer we didn't lose the history, since my comments on those issues (and the closed ones, too) often contain key information about use cases and design decisions that may not be available elsewhere, even from my memory. ;-) But, since I'm no longer in the lead on development, I think it would be better for someone closer to the future of things to do the prioritizing of what, if anything, to transfer as an issue or keep as documentation.
Yet alternatively, I could set the tracker to read-only, and keep it up for any foreseeable future. The reason I'm bringing this up is two-fold: 1. some people started using the tracker to distribute spam 2. some people apparently still think that the system is active, and continue reporting issues there. Both problems would be resolved by setting the tracker to read-only; shutting it down is actually not necessary (although it would slightly reduce our maintenance efforts). Regards, Martin
On 24 March 2014 20:53, "Martin v. Löwis"
Am 24.03.14 01:33, schrieb PJ Eby:
I think it would be a good idea to check with Jason and other PyPA volunteers to see if there is anyone else who can handle the moves. I'd prefer we didn't lose the history, since my comments on those issues (and the closed ones, too) often contain key information about use cases and design decisions that may not be available elsewhere, even from my memory. ;-) But, since I'm no longer in the lead on development, I think it would be better for someone closer to the future of things to do the prioritizing of what, if anything, to transfer as an issue or keep as documentation.
Yet alternatively, I could set the tracker to read-only, and keep it up for any foreseeable future.
The reason I'm bringing this up is two-fold: 1. some people started using the tracker to distribute spam 2. some people apparently still think that the system is active, and continue reporting issues there.
Both problems would be resolved by setting the tracker to read-only; shutting it down is actually not necessary (although it would slightly reduce our maintenance efforts).
That sounds good to me. I've also filed https://bitbucket.org/pypa/setuptools/issue/174/ to decide on a longer term solution. If Jason decides to review/migrate issues, it may be necessary to turn developer write access back on to allow issues to be marked as closed once they have been dealt with appropriately. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Nick Coghlan
On 24 March 2014 20:53, "Martin v. Löwis"
wrote: Both problems would be resolved by setting the tracker to read-only; shutting it down is actually not necessary (although it would slightly reduce our maintenance efforts).
That sounds good to me.
I've also filed https://bitbucket.org/pypa/setuptools/issue/174/ to decide on a longer term solution. If Jason decides to review/migrate issues, it may be necessary to turn developer write access back on to allow issues to be marked as closed once they have been dealt with appropriately.
Yep, looks like Jason came to the same conclusion(s) independently, but also wants better banners on the old tracker to alert people to the move. I guess we should move any further discussion to that ticket, since Jason's response time is quicker there than here. ;-)
participants (3)
-
"Martin v. Löwis"
-
Nick Coghlan
-
PJ Eby