Bug#1027215: Bug#1026539: How much do we lose if we remove theano (+keras, deepnano, invesalius)?

[Rebecca N. Palmer]

On 02/03/2023 10:38, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I admit I do not see any good reason to stick to the old version if we
> decided before that keras/deepnano are no real blockers to even drop
> theano.  Thus I was considering it more promising to spent my time on
> the latest version.

1.1.2 isn't the latest version, just the latest that calls the module 
theano rather than aesara.  (I chose it to package because I didn't want 
to fully break compatibility, then abandoned it because I didn't like 
how much it did break.)

>> Do you want to ask release team for permission to do this?
> 
> If it would have build smoothly on all architectures, yes.

If you wouldn't want to do this work if it can't get into bookworm 
(possibly because you'd prefer to package 2.0 as aesara if you have to 
wait until trixie anyway), you might want to ask them first.

> But we have
> the first trouble on arm64[1]
Sorry - I forgot that theano skips most of its tests on Salsa-CI 
(because there's enough of them to take several hours), which is 
probably why it "passed" that but failed the full build.

Given how many failures there are (everywhere), I don't consider this 
worth fixing, but you are of course free to disagree.

(If you're planning to xfail tests, note that I consider *wrong-answer* 
bugs (though not crash bugs) in this kind of package to be RC.  I 
haven't checked whether we currently have any.)