[tryton-debian] Fw: Bug#810007: Please consider suds-jurko in light of Fedora doing the same

[Mathias Behrle]

weitergeleitete Nachricht:

Datum: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 13:57:32 +0100
Von: Mathias Behrle <mathiasb at m9s.biz>
An: Christian Hofstaedtler <zeha at debian.org>, 810007 at bugs.debian.org
Cc: 788087 at bugs.debian.org
Betreff: Re: Bug#810007: Please consider suds-jurko in light of Fedora doing
the same


* Christian Hofstaedtler: " Bug#810007: Please consider suds-jurko in light of
  Fedora doing the same" (Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:52:45 +0100):

Hi Christian,

> Package: python-suds
> Priority: wishlist
> 
> Dear Maintainer,
> 
> Fedora may consider replacing their suds package with the suds-jurko
> fork [1].
> 
> Please consider if this would be a good thing for Debian, too
> (reducing cross-distro issues).

There is a long-standing issue about this subject at [1]. You probably didn't
find the issue, because it was automatically archived. I just unarchived the
bug and merged both.
 
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Suds_Jurko_Fork

Thanks for the link. 

I don't agree with the owner (Scott Talbert) about 

Upgrade/compatibility impact
No impact expected. 

and 

User Experience
No changes expected to user experience. 

because he was informed [2], that I was already bitten by API incompatibility of
suds-jurko vs. suds.

Furthermore the situation with suds-jurko has not changed in any respect:

Last release 2014-01-24 (2 years ago!)
Last commit on bitbucket: 2015-07-27
with an increasing number of unhandled issues and pull requests.


So for me the situation with suds-jurko is only a slight improvement over
original suds, both being problematic n the same way. A future maintainer of
suds-jurko in Debian has to be aware to be in charge to handle a quite
substantial number of patches and/or security issues on his own. As already
stated I am not in favor of introducing software with such implications into
the archive, at least I will not be the one to maintain it. Scott applied to
take over maintainership for python-suds those last days (by PM), to which I
will reply with a separate mail. 

> Thank you,
> Christian

Best,
Mathias

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=783029
[2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=788087


-- 

    Mathias Behrle
    PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0x8405BBF6


-- 

    Mathias Behrle
    PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0x8405BBF6
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/tryton-debian/attachments/20160106/6f83148e/attachment.sig>