Hi, Thanks Daniel for taking care of this point and contributing to it. Daniel already opened some reviews on this subject : https://review.opendev.org/#/c/758028/ This can be tracked using topic "*setuptools-explicit*" ( https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:setuptools-explicit) Hervé Beraud made a remark on review 758028: ~~~ The rationale behind these changes LGTM. However I've some concerns related to pbr: pbr rely on setuptools [1] and still support python2.7 [2] setuptools 50.3.0 only support python3 [3] So I wonder if we should also define a version which support python2.7 to avoid issues on with this context. setuptools dropped the support of python 2 with 45.0.0 [4] so we could use the version 44.1.1 [5] for this use case. [1] https://opendev.org/openstack/pbr/src/branch/master/setup.py#L16 [2] https://opendev.org/openstack/pbr/src/branch/master/setup.cfg#L25 [3] https://pypi.org/project/setuptools/50.3.0/ [4] https://setuptools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/history.html#v45-0-0 [5] https://pypi.org/project/setuptools/44.1.1/ ~~~ I think it could be worth defining the version or a rule (py2 vs py3) here before performing a large series of patches. Cheers, *SEBASTIEN BOYRON* Red Hat On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 10:31 AM Daniel Bengtsson <dbengt@redhat.com> wrote:
Le 02/10/2020 à 15:40, Sebastien Boyron a écrit :
I am opening the discussion and pointing to this right now, but I think we should wait for the Wallaby release before doing anything on that point to insert this modification into the regular development cycle. On a release point of view all the changes related to this proposal will be released through the classic release process and they will be landed with other projects changes, in other words it will not require a range of specific releases for projects. It's a good idea. I agree explicit is better than implicit. I'm interesting to help on this subject.