On 2021/06/13 18:51, Daniel Dickman wrote: > > > > On Jun 13, 2021, at 5:20 PM, Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > > > > On 2021/06/13 14:20, Daniel Dickman wrote: > >>> On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 12:58 PM Pavel Korovin <p...@tristero.se> wrote: > >>> > >>> On 06/13, Johnathan C. Maudlin wrote: > >>>> Has it become vital to move off of Ansible 2.9.x? Currently in Linux > >>>> land, specifically when looking at Fedora/CentOS and Ubuntu, they are > >>>> all still providing Ansible 2.9.x and I would assume Fedora would be the > >>>> first to move off of 2.9.x if there was a pressing need to do so. > >>>> > >>>> In my humble opinion, I think it might be reasonable to continue with > >>>> the Ansible 2.9.x branch as users who rely on a newer version can do so > >>>> using virtualenv and other such mechanisms. > >>> > >>> Johnathan, > >>> The main reason for me to switch is the fact that ansible-2.9 will not > >>> receive bugfixes except the security ones. Earlier or later ansible > >>> community will stop supporting v2.9 and we'll have to switch anyway. > >>> https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/devel/reference_appendices/release_and_maintenance.html#ansible-core-release-cycle > >>> > >> > >> ansible 2.9 is a blocker for updating py-sphinx to the 4.x series. > >> > > > > Probably not the only thing blocking updating sphinx, with the "Support > > for evaluating Python 2 syntax is deprecated and will be removed in > > Sphinx 4.0" warnings seen in the current version.. > > > > To clarify, ansible is the only thing left in my local tree. > > ghc was recently updated so is no longer an issue and I have trivial diffs > for the other 3 affected ports.
Ah good, thanks :) > Note that the idea would be to go to Sphinx 4.0.1 as 4.0.2 will require plist > updates in some of the consumers. Any particular reason not to do that? That's a common fact with sphinx updates anyway.
