* Scott Kitterman (deb...@kitterman.com) [100626 23:51]: > There is a bit of difference over how to specify which versions to build for, > but if we don't need to expose it externally (and I don't see a case for > this), then it's an internal matter for package build systems as long as they > support a requirement that arch: any packages be binNMUable for new Python > versions.
There are pre-ideas that we might be able to binNMU arch=all-packages as well - nothing that will come too early, but it might be useful to not depend on the fact that we only binNMU arch=any. > We've discussed this pretty broadly on debian-pyt...@l.d.o and in #debian- > python, so I think we have "enough" buy-in. In spite of some discussion I have seen, I haven't followed that enough to have an own opinion. Anyways, I trust you that you do it right - I was just stating what are the requirements of the release team (and why), and I think they're sensible (and if not, please feel free to say so). Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100627092844.gj13...@mails.so.argh.org
