Re: [patch] cygport : update to python 3.9

[Jon Turney <jon.turney@dronecode.org.uk>]

On 29/05/2022 16:54, Jon Turney wrote:
>>
>> Following is a sort of RFC, so let me know your opinion.
>>
>> Currently we have two type of Python packages
>>
>> 1) Pure python that exists at max as 2.7 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 plus 2 and 3
>>
>>     in that case 2/2.7 3/3.6 are EOL;
>>     I stopped last year to update the 2.7 and I am thinking to do the
>>     same for 3.6 now.
>>
>>     I do not see the need to continue to update 3.7, it never become
>>     default as we jumped from 3.6 to 3.8 and it is not more
>>     active upstream:
>>     https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0537/#lifespan
>>
>>     We can update the 3.8 and 3.9 while preparing/testing for 3.10
>>
>>     source package will continue to use the "python-*" form, while
>>     "python3-*" should not be used.
> 
> I disagree about the second half of that sentence.
> 
>  From a package management point of view:
> 
> * being able to script 'install python3, python3-foo' and get the foo 
> for the default python is useful
> 
> * having the setup remember that python3-foo was installed (causing 
> python39-foo to be installed), means when the default python is updated 
> from python39 to python3nn, setup will also install python3nn-foo, so 
> local scripts with a python3 shebang which 'import foo' continue to work.
> 
> I've posted a cygport patch which adjusts cygport to generate these 
> python3-foo virtual packages. What do you think about that?

I've released a cygport 0.35.2 with that patch [1] applied.

Please let me know if it causes you problems.

(It also fixes an issue where the presence of a python3 shebang wasn't 
correctly detected as a dependency on the python3 package due to python3 
being a symlink now)

[1] https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-apps/2022-May/042051.html