On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 08:25:23 +0100 Michael scherer <m...@zarb.org> wrote: > > > I'm not sure about "twice the work": you don't need to track twice the > > software releases (except for the interpreter itself), or twice the > > upstream patches, etc. > > Well, if we handle this like 2 separates languages, that mean 2 separates > rpms for > each modules. Or we should be clever when generating 1 rpm to have the modules > for both python 3 and python 2 generated ( Except when the developper did > choose > to have separate tarball or code base ) > Having one rpm that produces 2 modules also mean that we will rebuild all > modules > for python3 and all for python2, and I know that for example Buchan will not > like > the extranous trafic it would generate.
Well AFAIK some other distros (not Debian and Ubuntu which have a more complicated system) have separate packages per interpreter version (python2.4-twisted, python2.6-twisted, etc.). But you can put all versions in a single package too. I see no hard reason against that. Regards Antoine.
