A really bad quality package with a never-ending stream of unclear test failures, and blocked keywording and stabilization bugs. The bump to the most recent release is blocked by a ton of test regressions. No reverse dependencies left.
The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=7fb52e3c3d01a10e8de2d6229a8f3d5229723771 commit 7fb52e3c3d01a10e8de2d6229a8f3d5229723771 Author: Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2024-05-04 03:57:52 +0000 Commit: Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2024-05-04 04:00:02 +0000 package.mask: Last rite dev-python/dask, dev-python/dask-expr Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/931151 Signed-off-by: Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> profiles/package.mask | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
I understand that bad quality packages cannot stay in the gentoo repo. Are there plans to move it to the science overlay? Namely, dask is used more and more for parallelization of array computations, e.g., by xarray (it is still optional there, but might become mandatory: https://docs.xarray.dev/en/stable/user-guide/dask.html). What would upstream need to do to make it feasible to create a sufficient-quality package for gentoo? (I can't do it myself, but would try to ask them nicely and follow-up.) (My motivation for considering options for keeping it available is that I have xarray code that uses dask. I really need it to keep computational time/memory requirements in check for some of my simulations.)
(In reply to Erik Quaeghebeur from comment #2) > I understand that bad quality packages cannot stay in the gentoo repo. Are > there plans to move it to the science overlay? Namely, dask is used more and > more for parallelization of array computations, e.g., by xarray (it is still > optional there, but might become mandatory: > https://docs.xarray.dev/en/stable/user-guide/dask.html). > Anyone is free to add it - you're a long-term user so it'd be fine with me if you wanted permissions to the science overlay, but you could make a PR there as well. > What would upstream need to do to make it feasible to create a > sufficient-quality package for gentoo? (I can't do it myself, but would try > to ask them nicely and follow-up.) I'll let mgorny answer that - I've not been following it.
For a start, figure out how to make all (or at least the vast majority of) tests pass in the newest version (not in ::gentoo).
