On Nov 27, 2007 4:20 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We at the PythonApplicationsPackagingTeam are updating [1] the spe package, > but > it needs pychecker2, which is included in pychecker's tarball. Actually Spe > provides the module in its source tree, but we would like to get rid of it in > favour of pychecker's package, as it would mean we'd benefit from bug fixes, > new > releases... > > So it would be great for us if you could please include pychecker2.
Hi, I can put this code in the package... but I'm not sure that you would benefit from bug fixes and new releases, etc. Pychecker itself (the app) doesn't seem to use that code, and AFAIK it's never actually been released. I always thought it was just a work-in-progress, and I can't recall Neal (upstream) ever checking anything in to that directory. (I've been following the CVS checkins mailing list on SF for a few years now.) I will double-check with Neal and see what he thinks, just to be sure. As far as mechanics of the package go, I'm thinking that I should provide a new python-pychecker2 library package that is separate from the existing pychecker package. That way, you can depend more specifically on what you need. Does that sound like it would meet your needs? You've probably already checked before filing this bug report... but has the Spe version of this code diverged at all from the Pychecker version? Or did they copy it verbatim and leave it untouched? I'm just curious whether I (or upstream) will have to merge in any changes. KEN -- Kenneth J. Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.cedar-solutions.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
