At Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:59:47 +0100,
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Lucas/Antonio,
Thanks for all your good work, going through all mail thread and wiki, I have
couple of questions.
1) All existing packages will be renamed or only new packages will be updated.
2) After renaming, package will be in
On 28/03/11 at 14:08 +0530, Deepak Tripathi wrote:
At Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:59:47 +0100,
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Lucas/Antonio,
Thanks for all your good work, going through all mail thread and wiki, I have
couple of questions.
1) All existing packages will be renamed or only new packages
On 09/03/11 at 22:27 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum writes (Ruby changes for Wheezy):
We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby packaging for
Debian wheezy, and would appreciate some external feedback on our
proposals.
Our plans are described on
http
On 2011-03-10, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net wrote:
On 09/03/11 at 22:27 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum writes (Ruby changes for Wheezy):
We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby packaging for
Debian wheezy, and would appreciate some external feedback on our
On 10/03/11 at 12:00 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2011-03-10, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net wrote:
On 09/03/11 at 22:27 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum writes (Ruby changes for Wheezy):
We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby packaging for
Debian wheezy
On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
What is the correct way to override what dpkg-shlibdeps detects?
Either you replace the dependency associated to the interpreters' libraries
by providing debian/shlibs.local (or any other file that you indicate with
-L) or you tell dpkg-shlibdeps to put
[Josselin Mouette, 2011-03-06]
Le samedi 05 mars 2011 à 00:22 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit :
Breaks: python (= 2.8), python ( 2.5)
yeah, that's to avoid bug reports when someone will try to use this
package with (default) python 2.4 or python 2.8 (which will NEVER be
released,
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
[Josselin Mouette, 2011-03-06]
You might “like” Breaks, but this:
Depends: python
Breaks: python (= 2.8), python ( 2.5)
has the same semantics as:
Depends: python (= 2.5), python ( 2.8)
Yes it does; if you will not add
Lucas Nussbaum writes (Ruby changes for Wheezy):
We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby packaging for
Debian wheezy, and would appreciate some external feedback on our
proposals.
Our plans are described on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/RubyInWheezy
Don't hesitate to ask
Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net schrieb:
That's what we plan to do: for now, ruby1.8 is the default
implementation/version, and will have the highest priority in
alternatives. So switching to say jruby would require manual
intervention.
Exactly that will ensure you run into a mess.
On 06/03/11 at 10:02 +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net schrieb:
That's what we plan to do: for now, ruby1.8 is the default
implementation/version, and will have the highest priority in
alternatives. So switching to say jruby would require manual
Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:10 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
I prefer the situation where we empower users to make the switch if they
decide to, to the situation where we arbitrarily decide that users
should use Ruby 1.8 with no ability to change this (and get bug reports
for that). Note
Le samedi 05 mars 2011 à 00:22 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit :
Breaks: python (= 2.8), python ( 2.5)
yeah, that's to avoid bug reports when someone will try to use this
package with (default) python 2.4 or python 2.8 (which will NEVER be
released, BTW). dh_python2 will create similar
On 06/03/11 at 10:43 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:10 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
I prefer the situation where we empower users to make the switch if they
decide to, to the situation where we arbitrarily decide that users
should use Ruby 1.8 with no
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 10:58:47AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 06/03/11 at 10:43 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:10 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
I prefer the situation where we empower users to make the switch if they
decide to, to the situation where
Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:58 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
You are just going to empower users to shoot themselves in the foot.
What if users want the ability to shoot themselves in the foot?
Currently you’re the one holding the weapon.
Also, you seem to assume that Ruby 1.9 is
On 06/03/11 at 11:22 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:58 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
You are just going to empower users to shoot themselves in the foot.
What if users want the ability to shoot themselves in the foot?
Currently you’re the one holding
Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 11:40 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
Note that, for applications written in Ruby and packaged in Debian, we
will make sure that they work no matter what /usr/bin/ruby points to (if
necessary, by forcing the shebang to ruby1.8, and installing the correct
OoO En cette fin de matinée radieuse du dimanche 06 mars 2011, vers
11:40, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net disait :
Note that, for applications written in Ruby and packaged in Debian, we
will make sure that they work no matter what /usr/bin/ruby points to (if
necessary, by forcing
Hi,
We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby packaging for
Debian wheezy, and would appreciate some external feedback on our
proposals.
Our plans are described on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/RubyInWheezy
Don't hesitate to ask for details if needed.
- Lucas
--
To
On Mar 04, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net wrote:
Our plans are described on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/RubyInWheezy
Don't hesitate to ask for details if needed.
Is this acceptable to the major Ruby developers or do they still hate
you and everybody else involved?
--
ciao,
On 04/03/11 at 10:58 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Mar 04, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net wrote:
Our plans are described on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/RubyInWheezy
Don't hesitate to ask for details if needed.
Is this acceptable to the major Ruby developers or do they
On 2011-03-04, Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org wrote:
=== Generation of ri and rdoc documentation ===
We decide not to generate the ri and rdoc documentation, as there are good
online services providing it (like rdoc.info).
We might change our mind later. :)
Are you sure about that? Not
Philipp Kern tr...@philkern.de writes:
On 2011-03-04, Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org wrote:
=== Generation of ri and rdoc documentation ===
We decide not to generate the ri and rdoc documentation, as there are
good online services providing it (like rdoc.info). We might change
our mind
Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
=== Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
There is a huge demand (see
[[http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=548917|#548917]])
for using alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations.
On 04/03/11 at 14:00 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
=== Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
There is a huge demand (see
[[http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=548917|#548917]])
for
On 03/04/2011 02:00 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
=== Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
There is a huge demand (see
[[http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=548917|#548917]])
for using
On 04/03/11 at 14:26 +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 03/04/2011 02:00 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
=== Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
There is a huge demand (see
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 02:26:10PM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 03/04/2011 02:00 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
=== Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
There is a huge demand (see
Heyho!
On Friday 04 March 2011 14.16:34 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Sorry, could you explain how it works in python, when a given binary
package contains stuff for both python 2.6 and 2.7, for example?
I'm not involved with Python packages, so somebody correct me please.
The way it's done is that
[Adrian von Bidder, 2011-03-04]
The way it's done is that the packages declare what versions of python they
support:
python-pygments, for example:
python-pygments uses dh_python2 which takes a little bit different
approach than dh_pycentral or dh_pysupport.
dh_python2 ships all symlinks in
31 matches
Mail list logo
