From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42852) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ioHnL-0001SX-5z for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2020 21:07:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ioHnK-0004xj-8w for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2020 21:07:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:38901) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ioHnK-0004xf-6J for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2020 21:07:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ioHnK-0001FS-1A for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2020 21:07:02 -0500 Subject: [bug#38824] [PATCH] gnu: mercurial: Update to 5.2.1. Resent-Message-ID: Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2020 02:06:16 +0000 (UTC) From: Brett Gilio Message-ID: <46bbed98-fc0e-4382-b077-1387c7394dfd@localhost> In-Reply-To: <87pnfy71dt.fsf@elephly.net> References: <162d0ac10569d0aa3ba451a1ab2b115667ba6dc8.camel@gnu.org> <8736cw16uh.fsf@gnu.org> <0e2a74312eba3617dda3613038d16e76c55c4e0b.camel@gnu.org> <87h81ah1in.fsf@lafreniere.xyz> <87pnfy71dt.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: joseph@lafreniere.xyz, 38824@debbugs.gnu.org Jan 5, 2020 2:30:14 AM Ricardo Wurmus : > > LaFreniere, Joseph writes: > > > > I think that for now the options are to > > 1. continue using Python2 for Mercurial; > > 2. use Python3 but disable all tests, as Janssen's patch suggests; > > 3. use Python3 but disable the known-failing tests; or > > 4. hold off on updating the package until upstream supports > > Python3 across its entire test suite. > > > > Of those three, I am most in favor of the third option. I would > > be glad to submit a patch that implements it if there is agreement > > to take that direction. > > > > I agree that option 3 (with a link to the upstream discussion) is the > right way to go forward. > > Thanks! > > -- > Ricardo > I am also in agreement that working-around the failing tests is the best option, with a backup of just disabling the tests until the python3 incompatibilities are resolved. We need to work away from python2 wherever possible. Since the upstream is aware of the problem I see avoiding python2 as a reasonable alternative to work-arounds. -- Brett M. Gilio GNU Guix, Contributor | GNU Project, Webmaster [DFC0 C7F7 9EE6 0CA7 AE55 5E19 6722 43C4 A03F 0EEE]