Donovan Baarda writes: > On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 02:28:52PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > > Hi, Colin Watson wrote: > > > > > Incidentally, I think that python2.3 should definitely depend on python, > > > even if unversioned. This is what python2.2 in testing does, and it > > > would avoid the "I installed python2.3 but my programs that use > > > /usr/bin/python still don't work!" FAQ. > > > > So include a "Recommends: python" control line. As per policy, section > > 7.2, that would be strong enough for this situation. ("The Recommends > > field should list packages that would be found together with this one in > > all but unusual installations.") > > Yeah, the "Recomends" would be much better than a "Depends".
will be changed, after 2.3 enters testing. > The second problem is is when we get python (2.4), a new python2.3 > package will need to be released just to fix the dependencies. The > Python Policy was designed so that no pythonX.Y(-foo) packages would > need to be updated when python (X.Y+1) is released. not true. the 2.3 upload is needed for not building the unversioned python packages. > Having the python policy more visible would probably do more to answer > FAQ's than having busted dependencies on packages :-) /usr/share/doc/python should be prominent enough. I will not formally submit the python policy before the sarge release, we'll have plenty of time after the sarge release ... Matthias