On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 10:17:21 +0000 Turbo Fredriksson <tu...@bayour.com> wrote:
> On 8 Nov 2016, at 09:06, Neil Williams <codeh...@debian.org> wrote: > > > Just install and use apt-mark hold to keep at that version. You > > could also create a local apt repository which has 1.8 instead of > > 1.10 using tools like reprepro. I routinely script things like that > > for specific test operations - echo the apt source at a new file > > 'django.list' in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/, update, install run > > apt-mark and optionally remove the apt source. > > When I said Horizon was broken, I didn’t mean it was broken just for > me. It simply don’t work (correctly) with Django 1.10. That much would be obvious to anyone who has worked with python-django in the past. When an app hasn't been migrated to the new version of django, every instance of that app using that version is broken. Please don't assume that this is unusual or unexpected. I've done my own django upgrades from 1.4 to 1.6 to 1.7 to 1.8 to 1.9 and to 1.10. My own package currently uses 1.10 in unstable and 1.8 in jessie-backports. It is entirely manageable and I see no reason for python-django1.8 to be in unstable. Equally, I'm a user of python-django in Debian, I'm not the one who would have to do the work of creating a NEW python-django1.8 package. This close to the freeze, the only possible chance would be to put a NEW package into experimental but I'm not aware of any precedent for using experimental for an *older* version of the package already in unstable. It would have to be a completely new package or the archive software would simply delete the 1.8 build as obsolete (in unstable and testing, it most certainly is obsolete). > So any “hack” isn’t going to benefit the greater community. We could > really need 1.8 and/or 1.9 into the official repos so that the Horizon > deps could be changed with an OR.. As I said, I don't see python-django1.8 being an option for unstable at this time. Other sources of the package exist at the versions you require. Your particular app must and will eventually migrate to 1.10 anyway, so a temporary fix on your side is the appropriate solution instead of the much larger workload of re-introducing an obsolete version into experimental with the delays which are inherent to such a process. Packages often take two weeks or more to be accepted as NEW. This is not just putting a file into a directory, there is a *lot* more to it than that. One web app which has not yet migrated would seem to be insufficient to justify that workload. 1.10 was uploaded to unstable in August and 1.9 had deprecation warnings which could / should have been handled upstream at the time, dating back to June. The greater django community is already on 1.10. Really, just pull in 1.8 from jessie-backports. It is a truly minor adjustment for a temporary problem. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpbU8MlrJdew.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Python-modules-team mailing list Python-modules-team@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-modules-team