Hi Scott, On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 17:27:24 -0500 Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> wrote: > > Since progress is being made, it seems a like it would be better not to > remove > it. > > What would you think of uploading what you tested to experimental (with > enough > tests disabled it builds) and then ping the bug and I'll remove it from > unstable? That will enable it to remain in Debian and move back to Unstable > (and presumably Testing) when you are ready without causing any confusion for > the Python 3.10 transition. >
Unfortunately I didn't receive your email because Andrey is 1000550-submitter. I've read that other DDs have become upset by not receiving any notifications until the package was removed from the archive, and I believe it's worth amending the process to include both the Maintainer and Uploaders in CC for removal bugs (arguably all bugs, but I digress). This proposal is to prevent demotivating social issues from emerging. Sadly, in this case the "one failing test" I wrote of is central to Elpy's functionality (ie: the Python Debugger interface, and/or the tests involving it are broken), and disabling it is not sufficient to prevent FTBFS. Thank you for your patience waiting for a resolution. I guess this is the end of Elpy's almost five year life in Debian--it was the Debian's first Python IDE, and I invested uncountable hours of my life into making it work (on Debian), and keeping it working. It's sad that this didn't count for something among the involved teams, but oh well... I hope the LSP future works out OK :-) Regards, Nicholas
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
