bug#26868: [PATCH] gnu: python-pytest-runner: Update to 2.11.1.

bug#26868: [PATCH] gnu: python-pytest-runner: Update to 2.11.1.

[Roel Janssen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: 0001-gnu-python-pytest-runner-Update-to-2.11.1.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1070 bytes --]

From 33ba51e99c62243905cb88466eb5bfea557aaf4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 19:53:45 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: python-pytest-runner: Update to 2.11.1.

* gnu/packages/python.scm (python-pytest-runner): Update to 2.11.1.
---
 gnu/packages/python.scm | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/python.scm b/gnu/packages/python.scm
index 60d3868e9..be0202de6 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/python.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/python.scm
@@ -1879,14 +1879,14 @@ supports coverage of subprocesses.")
 (define-public python-pytest-runner
   (package
     (name "python-pytest-runner")
-    (version "2.6.2")
+    (version "2.11.1")
     (source
      (origin
        (method url-fetch)
        (uri (pypi-uri "pytest-runner" version))
        (sha256
         (base32
-         "1nwcqx0l3fv52kv8526wy8ypzghbq96c96di318d98d3wh7a8xg7"))))
+         "1cw978kqqcq916b9gfns1qjqvg33c5ail5jhw9054dsynkm32flq"))))
     (build-system python-build-system)
     (arguments
      `(#:phases
-- 
2.12.2


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 289 bytes --]


Dear Guix,

When attempting to add another package (python-maildir-deduplicate),
I needed to upgrade this one.  Since I'm not sure about the impact of
this update, I'd like to have an opinion on whether this can go in
as-is, or that more care should be taken.

Kind regards,
Roel Janssen

bug#26868: [PATCH] gnu: python-pytest-runner: Update to 2.11.1.

[Marius Bakke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 946 bytes --]

Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org> writes:

> From 33ba51e99c62243905cb88466eb5bfea557aaf4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org>
> Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 19:53:45 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: python-pytest-runner: Update to 2.11.1.

[...]

> When attempting to add another package (python-maildir-deduplicate),
> I needed to upgrade this one.  Since I'm not sure about the impact of
> this update, I'd like to have an opinion on whether this can go in
> as-is, or that more care should be taken.

The impact of a package change can be determined with `guix refresh`:

$ guix refresh -l python{,2}-pytest-runner
Building the following 38 packages would ensure 113 dependent packages
are rebuilt: [...]

Since there are "only" 138 rebuilds it should be good for 'master'. It's
good to try and build some/most of the dependent packages to check for
any obvious breakage before such version jumps; but this seems fairly
safe to me.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

bug#26868: [PATCH] gnu: python-pytest-runner: Update to 2.11.1.

[julien lepiller]

Le 2017-05-10 23:15, Marius Bakke a écrit :
> Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org> writes:
> 
>> From 33ba51e99c62243905cb88466eb5bfea557aaf4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org>
>> Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 19:53:45 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: python-pytest-runner: Update to 2.11.1.
> 
> [...]
> 
>> When attempting to add another package (python-maildir-deduplicate),
>> I needed to upgrade this one.  Since I'm not sure about the impact of
>> this update, I'd like to have an opinion on whether this can go in
>> as-is, or that more care should be taken.
> 
> The impact of a package change can be determined with `guix refresh`:
> 
> $ guix refresh -l python{,2}-pytest-runner
> Building the following 38 packages would ensure 113 dependent packages
> are rebuilt: [...]
> 
> Since there are "only" 138 rebuilds it should be good for 'master'. 
> It's
> good to try and build some/most of the dependent packages to check for
> any obvious breakage before such version jumps; but this seems fairly
> safe to me.

Actually, I was about to push that this evening as part of my pootle 
patch series [1]. I've already tested rebuilding all dependent packages 
of the python- and python2 variants, and there is no new failure. The 
only difference being that your commit comment does not reference 
python2-pytest-runner, I think you can push your patch before mine if 
you want, or wait for me to push my patch series.

[1]: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=26613

bug#26868: [PATCH] gnu: python-pytest-runner: Update to 2.11.1.

[Roel Janssen]

julien lepiller writes:

> Le 2017-05-10 23:15, Marius Bakke a écrit:
>> Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>>> From 33ba51e99c62243905cb88466eb5bfea557aaf4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org>
>>> Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 19:53:45 +0200
>>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: python-pytest-runner: Update to 2.11.1.
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>>> When attempting to add another package (python-maildir-deduplicate),
>>> I needed to upgrade this one.  Since I'm not sure about the impact of
>>> this update, I'd like to have an opinion on whether this can go in
>>> as-is, or that more care should be taken.
>> 
>> The impact of a package change can be determined with `guix refresh`:
>> 
>> $ guix refresh -l python{,2}-pytest-runner
>> Building the following 38 packages would ensure 113 dependent packages
>> are rebuilt: [...]
>> 
>> Since there are "only" 138 rebuilds it should be good for 'master'. 
>> It's
>> good to try and build some/most of the dependent packages to check for
>> any obvious breakage before such version jumps; but this seems fairly
>> safe to me.
>
> Actually, I was about to push that this evening as part of my pootle 
> patch series [1]. I've already tested rebuilding all dependent packages 
> of the python- and python2 variants, and there is no new failure. The 
> only difference being that your commit comment does not reference 
> python2-pytest-runner, I think you can push your patch before mine if 
> you want, or wait for me to push my patch series.
>
> [1]: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=26613

Oh great!  I'll wait for your patch series.
Thanks for the great work!

Kind regards,
Roel Janssen