[Debian-med-packaging] Bug#939181: cycle: should it be RM'd ?

[Ana Guerrero Lopez]

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 06:06:59PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 10:56:23AM -0500, Scott Talbert wrote:
> > Is there any hope for a Python 3 port of cycle, or should it just be RM'd?
> 
> Ana, could you please have a last word about this?
>
Thanks Andreas.

I haven't given up yet in a Python 3 port, but if cycle must be removed for the
sake of removing Python 2, just do it. It's always possible to re-introduce
the package later.

Cheers,
Ana