python2.4
Hi, Somebody had to ask again, so this time I'll do it. What's holding up python2.4 as the default python even in unstable? Ganesan -- Ganesan Rajagopal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: python 2.4?
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That much is obvious. The point is wouldn't it be confusing to the user to call the package python-ctypes when it doesn't support the current python version? Oh well, I guess I can put in something in the description to explain this. A package named python-ctypes must support the current python version: it must ensure this by having a versioned dependency on the versions of python that it is compatible with. That means that if python-ctypes only supports python ( 2.5), and python is at Version: 2.5.0-1, python-ctypes will not be installable (and will need to be updated). This is exactly my point. There will be no python-ctypes supporting python = 2.5. That's why I am arguing that there needs to policy exceptions to allow a package named python2.4-ctypes. Josselin seems to think different. Ganesan -- Ganesan Rajagopal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: python 2.4?
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Le jeudi 18 mai 2006 à 00:11 -0500, Steve Langasek a écrit : A package named python-ctypes must support the current python version: it must ensure this by having a versioned dependency on the versions of python that it is compatible with. That means that if python-ctypes only supports python ( 2.5), and python is at Version: 2.5.0-1, python-ctypes will not be installable (and will need to be updated). At that moment, python could even start to provide python-ctypes. Then what would you name the ctypes package supporting python2.4? Ganesan -- Ganesan Rajagopal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: python 2.4?
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Le mercredi 17 mai 2006 à 14:12 +0530, Ganesan Rajagopal a écrit : I understand the upgrade issues that pythonX.Y packages cause with multiple versions of python in Debian. However, for binary modules I don't really see an alternative in some cases. How about this alternate proposal for binary modules * python-foo must support the current python version. * python-foo can optionally include support for older python versions (I am still not convinced on this one). * Alternatively, pythonX.Y-foo is allowed to support older versions of python in the archive. Over my dead body. That makes it a bit difficult, where do you live ;-)? There's no point in simplifying python packaging if in fact it becomes more complicated because we allow exceptions. Then please suggest how to handle the issues that I raised with the new policy. Ganesan -- Ganesan Rajagopal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: python 2.4?
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In short, the main decision has been to drop entirely python2.x-foo packages. They will, however, be provided as virtual packages, but only if something actually needs them. ... For C extensions, it was decided to build them for all available python versions in a single python-foo package. For example, currently we have python2.3 and python2.4. The package would contain /usr/lib/python2.[34]/site-packages/foo.so and depend on python (= 2.3), python ( 2.5). The python-all-dev package will be used to build this. Hmm, seems a bit backward to me. What if I don't have python2.3 installed at all. What's the point in keeping /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/foo.so around? Ganesan -- Ganesan Rajagopal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please add me to Python Modules Team
Hi, I currently maintain clientcookie, fixedpoint and ctypes python packages. I am not subscribed to debian-python list but I am already subscribed to the corresponding newsgroup in gmane. Ganesan -- Ganesan Rajagopal (rganesan at debian.org) | GPG Key: 1024D/5D8C12EA Web: http://employees.org/~rganesan| http://rganesan.blogspot.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New python maintenance team
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think everyone is agreed that we want greater automization of python transitions, but the longer this is postponed, the more problematic this becomes for etch. It's my impression that there is enough untapped manpower available to work on starting this transition the old, hard way that it's not to our advantage to continue postponing it due to the promise of better methods -- when those methods will still require sourceful uploads for the first round of implementation anyway. FWIW, seconded. Please just upload python2.4 as the default python version. We have enough time get the infrastructure in place and attempt the automated transition for python2.5. Ganesan -- Ganesan Rajagopal (rganesan at debian.org) | GPG Key: 1024D/5D8C12EA Web: http://employees.org/~rganesan| http://rganesan.blogspot.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
