On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 11:24 -0600, Doug Newgard via arch-dev-public wrote: > On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 16:59:21 +0000 > Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public <arch-dev-public@archlinux.org> > wrote: > > > On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 16:58 +0100, Andreas Radke via arch-dev- > > public > > wrote: > > > Am Sat, 21 Nov 2020 14:34:24 +0000 > > > schrieb Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public > > > <arch-dev-public@archlinux.org>: > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have any big issue with this? What are your > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > [1] https://www.python.org/downloads/ > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Filipe Laíns > > > > > > -1 > > > > > > Arch is yours. Whoever needs more and older releases on the > > > system - > > > just do it yourself! In the past we said "use abs and AUR - Arch > > > is > > > the base to make it your own". > > > > This argument can be used to deny adding any package to the repos. > > You > > need this library, tool, etc.? Just add it yourself. > > > > Why are we packaging software that is used by far less people but > > we > > can't package these Python interpreters which are being actively > > missed > > by people? > > > > > I don't want to see users raising bugs that something doesn't > > > work > > > with an older version of python. And I don't want to see these > > > requests > > > pop up every now and then to add even more stuff in different > > > versions. > > > > We already have multiple versions of Java, Ruby, Javascript, etc. > > hell, > > even Python. I don't think having people opening bugs because they > > are > > deliberately using an older version of Python is a big problem. It > > hasn't been for any of the other languages, I don't think it will > > be > > here. > > I think this is an hypothetical that doesn't really materialize > > into > > reality. > > > > > It's sad enough we still have python2 and gtk2 around. To have > > > gcc9 > > > around and other duplicates is not what I want to see growing in > > > Arch. > > > > What you call sad I call a bad UX. Why do we need to force users to > > compile active releases of the Python interpreters themselves, > > which > > can take a long time if they are building with optimization, or to > > resort to pre-built repos with much lower security standards than > > us, > > when there are people willing to maintain them? > > > > I can't understand how it's sad to help out users by not forcing > > them > > to resort the sort of things I mentioned above, as long as we are > > not > > struggling to do so. I like helping people, that's why I am a > > packager, > > that is the opposite of sad for me, so I really can't understand > > this. > > It's more concerning to me that you can't understand this argument > than > anything else so far. Arch keeps old things around in the repos when > they're > required by other things in the repos. It's a necessary evil, not > something to > be actively encouraged.
I understand that. I am not asking to put all releases of Python on the repos, only the active ones, which people are using. > > > I don't want to see our distribution transformed into another > > > Debian. > > > > That is not what is happening. > > > > Cheers, > > Filipe Laíns > -- Filipe Laíns
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part