Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 09:50 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 14:23 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: > [snip] > > You should always test with your minimum requirements. > [snip] > > It's not that simple. Some (fairly minor) changes are needed to make > things build with Python 2.5. We already know that they build with > Python 2.4. They need to build with both, not just one. Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you should only test with your minimum requirements. You should, of course, test with as many permutations of your supported platform as is feasible. (Yes, this gets unwieldy, but you should try anyway.) My point was that, if you never test with the platform that you claim is the required minimum, you can't really guarantee that it works. I've actually seen quite a few cases where a programmer uses some newer functionality in some library without updating the version requirements. Heck, I'm sure I've done it myself. It's really easy to do by accident. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 09:48 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 12:52 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: > > I worry that this move would result in programmers using > > 2.5-only features. Our intrepid testers wouldn't notice, > > because they're building from jhbuild. But we'd create > > an effective 2.5 dependency that our distributors would > > have to deal with. > > I think they'd tell us about problems. But for the slower distros that don't follow our bleeding-edge release cycle, would they find them before we've made our stable releases? (And if there is any distro that wants to package Gnome 2.20 with Python 2.4, it's probably going to be one of the slow-moving ones.) -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Qua, 2007-03-14 at 13:18 +0200, Fernando Herrera wrote: > On 3/14/07, Murray Cumming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 12:52 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: > > > If a program works correctly with Python 2.4, is there > > > actually a danger of it not working correctly with 2.5? > > > That sounds broken. > > > > Python 2.4 and 2.5 install in parallel so already-built applications > > will not be broken. > > In the past, when we included python 2.4 in the jubuild bootstrap > module I had lot of problems when building/running python programs on > FC. I think that different compilation options resulted in binary > incompatible python modules (some UCS size or something like that) > > 1) when running my jhbuild session, trying to run a system python > program like yum didn't work, because it was using python from jhbuild > and tried to load a module (.so) from system python, that where > incompatible > > 2) For building some apps under my jhbuild environements I had to > compile a lot of external python modules to make the app build, > because python from jhbuild refused to use my system dir modules. Some > of them were pyrex, twisted, numeric, etc... > > So, questions: > a) Is the binary incompatibility depending on configure options stills > present? Yes, but that has nothing to do with different python versions, just different python builds. > b) if yes, could we build python 2.5 in jhbuild autodetecting and > matching system python configuration? It could be done; just remove python from the bootstrap modules (and let people remove any /opt/gnome-devel/bin/python* that they have, or whatever). But then people have to define PYTHONPATH correctly. Or let "jhbuild shell/run" do it.. Personally I prefer to have a custom built python, for better debugging. But I would understand if people want to use the system python instead. In fact, using the system python by default would allow GNOME to be tested with multiple Python versions at the same time; I think it may be a very good idea just because of that... -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The universe is always one step beyond logic. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On 3/14/07, Murray Cumming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 12:52 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: > > If a program works correctly with Python 2.4, is there > > actually a danger of it not working correctly with 2.5? > > That sounds broken. > > Python 2.4 and 2.5 install in parallel so already-built applications > will not be broken. In the past, when we included python 2.4 in the jubuild bootstrap module I had lot of problems when building/running python programs on FC. I think that different compilation options resulted in binary incompatible python modules (some UCS size or something like that) 1) when running my jhbuild session, trying to run a system python program like yum didn't work, because it was using python from jhbuild and tried to load a module (.so) from system python, that where incompatible 2) For building some apps under my jhbuild environements I had to compile a lot of external python modules to make the app build, because python from jhbuild refused to use my system dir modules. Some of them were pyrex, twisted, numeric, etc... So, questions: a) Is the binary incompatibility depending on configure options stills present? b) if yes, could we build python 2.5 in jhbuild autodetecting and matching system python configuration? Thanks! Salu2 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 14:23 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: [snip] > You should always test with your minimum requirements. [snip] It's not that simple. Some (fairly minor) changes are needed to make things build with Python 2.5. We already know that they build with Python 2.4. They need to build with both, not just one. -- Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 12:52 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: > If a program works correctly with Python 2.4, is there > actually a danger of it not working correctly with 2.5? > That sounds broken. Python 2.4 and 2.5 install in parallel so already-built applications will not be broken. But if you choose to rebuild your application against a newer Python, you might need some changes to make it build without errors or warnings. Ignoring compiler warnings could lead to problems on 64-bit systems, but possibly not more problems than with Python 2.4. (This is about the Python C API, not about running Python code directly.) > I worry that this move would result in programmers using > 2.5-only features. Our intrepid testers wouldn't notice, > because they're building from jhbuild. But we'd create > an effective 2.5 dependency that our distributors would > have to deal with. I think they'd tell us about problems. -- Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 18:11 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > On Ter, 2007-03-13 at 12:52 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 17:38 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > > > On Ter, 2007-03-13 at 16:57 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2007, Elijah Newren wrote: > > > > > Unlike GNOME and Linux, Python does not use odd version numbers for > > > > > development versions. Thus 2.5 is the latest production version of > > > > > Python, rather than the latest development version. > > > > > > > > I know 2.5 is a stable release; my point is that this needlessly raises > > > > the bar to build GNOME: anyone is free to build GNOME with whatever > > > > version of libc6, gcc, or python that one wants to catch some bugs (in > > > > GNOME or in these projects), but imposing the python version to be so > > > > high by default seems a gratuitous change. 3 out of 5 Ubuntu releases > > > > do not have Python 2.5 by default, no Debian release has it and the > > > > next one wont have it. > > > > > > I am not proposing that GNOME modules using Python should require a > > > minimum Python version of 2.5. I am only proposing that "jhbuild > > > bootstrap" install the python 2.5 tarball instead of python 2.4. The > > > effect of this change is: > > > > > > 1. We start putting more emphasis on testing GNOME-over-python2.5 > > > rather than GNOME-over-python2.4 (the latter has already been > > > extensively tested over the years, while the former hasn't); > > > > > > 2. We require that GNOME modules using Python make an effort to work > > > on Python 2.5, in addition to Python 2.4. > > > > > > I think primarily it's a matter of which version of python we prefer > > > to test. I say we test GNOME with python 2.5 because it's the new > > > stable version of python and python 2.4 is not maintained any more. > > > > If a program works correctly with Python 2.4, is there > > actually a danger of it not working correctly with 2.5? > > That sounds broken. > > Yes, there is a lot of danger of it not working with 2.5 in particular > in 64 bit systems. Python does not guarantee strict API/ABI > compatibility; that issue has been discussed extensively in the past in > this very mailing list. Python changes API and ABI of extension modules > and even the language itself, albeit very slowly so as to not cause too > many headaches. Yes, looking through my archives, it seems we had a very long discussion about this in September/October 2004, when we first proposed allowing Python in the desktop. People were concerned we would have problems like this. > In this case, however, Python in 2.5 decided to change the extensions > API to use "long int" rather than "int" in a lot of places. In LP64 > systems that represents a major ABI change. This change, however, only > gives few compilation warnings for some cases, or in other cases not > even a compilation warning is given (like the s# convertion specifier in > PyArg_ParseTuple) and the programmers have to pay attention to the code. > Sometimes, only in runtime can errors be caught. > > > > > I worry that this move would result in programmers using > > 2.5-only features. Our intrepid testers wouldn't notice, > > because they're building from jhbuild. But we'd create > > an effective 2.5 dependency that our distributors would > > have to deal with. > > 1. Distributions that are bleeding edge enough to include GNOME 2.20 > but still using Python 2.4 are just... crazy :| Be that as it may, if 2.4 is our officially recommended version of Python, then it has to work. Hence, we should test with it. > 2. For the N-th time, I am not advocating dropping support for Python > 2.4. I am saying that it is important that we test Python 2.5, more so > than testing Python 2.4. I understand that. This is the scenario I'm talking about: Julie is the maintainer of Plankton, an application written in Python. Her build and testing environment is switched to Python 2.5, and she discovers an incompatibility that makes Plankton not function. She fixes the problem. Unfortunately, the change she made is not compatible with Python 2.4. Since she's building and testing on Python 2.5, she doesn't know this. Hence, Plankton is now broken under Python 2.4. This is particularly annoying because 2.4 is the officially recommended version of Python for Plankton. You should always test with your minimum requirements. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On 3/13/07, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2007, Michael R. Head wrote: > > Debian/unstable also still has GNOME 2.14. > > But can jhbuild GNOME 2.16 and 2.18. ...and would still be able to even if it only had Python 2.3 installed by default: jhbuild builds python as part of the bootstrap step. The same issue existed when we switched from python 2.3 to python 2.4; my distro didn't have python 2.4 but jhbuild built it just fine. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Ter, 2007-03-13 at 12:52 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 17:38 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > > On Ter, 2007-03-13 at 16:57 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2007, Elijah Newren wrote: > > > > Unlike GNOME and Linux, Python does not use odd version numbers for > > > > development versions. Thus 2.5 is the latest production version of > > > > Python, rather than the latest development version. > > > > > > I know 2.5 is a stable release; my point is that this needlessly raises > > > the bar to build GNOME: anyone is free to build GNOME with whatever > > > version of libc6, gcc, or python that one wants to catch some bugs (in > > > GNOME or in these projects), but imposing the python version to be so > > > high by default seems a gratuitous change. 3 out of 5 Ubuntu releases > > > do not have Python 2.5 by default, no Debian release has it and the > > > next one wont have it. > > > > I am not proposing that GNOME modules using Python should require a > > minimum Python version of 2.5. I am only proposing that "jhbuild > > bootstrap" install the python 2.5 tarball instead of python 2.4. The > > effect of this change is: > > > > 1. We start putting more emphasis on testing GNOME-over-python2.5 > > rather than GNOME-over-python2.4 (the latter has already been > > extensively tested over the years, while the former hasn't); > > > > 2. We require that GNOME modules using Python make an effort to work > > on Python 2.5, in addition to Python 2.4. > > > > I think primarily it's a matter of which version of python we prefer > > to test. I say we test GNOME with python 2.5 because it's the new > > stable version of python and python 2.4 is not maintained any more. > > If a program works correctly with Python 2.4, is there > actually a danger of it not working correctly with 2.5? > That sounds broken. Yes, there is a lot of danger of it not working with 2.5 in particular in 64 bit systems. Python does not guarantee strict API/ABI compatibility; that issue has been discussed extensively in the past in this very mailing list. Python changes API and ABI of extension modules and even the language itself, albeit very slowly so as to not cause too many headaches. In this case, however, Python in 2.5 decided to change the extensions API to use "long int" rather than "int" in a lot of places. In LP64 systems that represents a major ABI change. This change, however, only gives few compilation warnings for some cases, or in other cases not even a compilation warning is given (like the s# convertion specifier in PyArg_ParseTuple) and the programmers have to pay attention to the code. Sometimes, only in runtime can errors be caught. > > I worry that this move would result in programmers using > 2.5-only features. Our intrepid testers wouldn't notice, > because they're building from jhbuild. But we'd create > an effective 2.5 dependency that our distributors would > have to deal with. 1. Distributions that are bleeding edge enough to include GNOME 2.20 but still using Python 2.4 are just... crazy :| 2. For the N-th time, I am not advocating dropping support for Python 2.4. I am saying that it is important that we test Python 2.5, more so than testing Python 2.4. -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The universe is always one step beyond logic ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 17:38 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > On Ter, 2007-03-13 at 16:57 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2007, Elijah Newren wrote: > > > Unlike GNOME and Linux, Python does not use odd version numbers for > > > development versions. Thus 2.5 is the latest production version of > > > Python, rather than the latest development version. > > > > I know 2.5 is a stable release; my point is that this needlessly raises > > the bar to build GNOME: anyone is free to build GNOME with whatever > > version of libc6, gcc, or python that one wants to catch some bugs (in > > GNOME or in these projects), but imposing the python version to be so > > high by default seems a gratuitous change. 3 out of 5 Ubuntu releases > > do not have Python 2.5 by default, no Debian release has it and the > > next one wont have it. > > I am not proposing that GNOME modules using Python should require a > minimum Python version of 2.5. I am only proposing that "jhbuild > bootstrap" install the python 2.5 tarball instead of python 2.4. The > effect of this change is: > > 1. We start putting more emphasis on testing GNOME-over-python2.5 > rather than GNOME-over-python2.4 (the latter has already been > extensively tested over the years, while the former hasn't); > > 2. We require that GNOME modules using Python make an effort to work > on Python 2.5, in addition to Python 2.4. > > I think primarily it's a matter of which version of python we prefer > to test. I say we test GNOME with python 2.5 because it's the new > stable version of python and python 2.4 is not maintained any more. If a program works correctly with Python 2.4, is there actually a danger of it not working correctly with 2.5? That sounds broken. I worry that this move would result in programmers using 2.5-only features. Our intrepid testers wouldn't notice, because they're building from jhbuild. But we'd create an effective 2.5 dependency that our distributors would have to deal with. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Ter, 2007-03-13 at 16:57 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2007, Elijah Newren wrote: > > Unlike GNOME and Linux, Python does not use odd version numbers for > > development versions. Thus 2.5 is the latest production version of > > Python, rather than the latest development version. > > I know 2.5 is a stable release; my point is that this needlessly raises > the bar to build GNOME: anyone is free to build GNOME with whatever > version of libc6, gcc, or python that one wants to catch some bugs (in > GNOME or in these projects), but imposing the python version to be so > high by default seems a gratuitous change. 3 out of 5 Ubuntu releases > do not have Python 2.5 by default, no Debian release has it and the > next one wont have it. I am not proposing that GNOME modules using Python should require a minimum Python version of 2.5. I am only proposing that "jhbuild bootstrap" install the python 2.5 tarball instead of python 2.4. The effect of this change is: 1. We start putting more emphasis on testing GNOME-over-python2.5 rather than GNOME-over-python2.4 (the latter has already been extensively tested over the years, while the former hasn't); 2. We require that GNOME modules using Python make an effort to work on Python 2.5, in addition to Python 2.4. I think primarily it's a matter of which version of python we prefer to test. I say we test GNOME with python 2.5 because it's the new stable version of python and python 2.4 is not maintained any more. -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The universe is always one step beyond logic ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 17:26 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2007, Michael R. Head wrote: > > Debian/unstable also still has GNOME 2.14. > > But can jhbuild GNOME 2.16 and 2.18. Just like you can compile python 2.5 ;) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007, Michael R. Head wrote: > Debian/unstable also still has GNOME 2.14. But can jhbuild GNOME 2.16 and 2.18. -- Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 09:42 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:cies? > > (While we're at it: Debian still has Python 2.4 as default.) Debian/unstable also still has GNOME 2.14. -- Michael R. Head <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.suppressingfire.org/~burner/ http://suppressingfire.livejournal.com smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007, Elijah Newren wrote: > Unlike GNOME and Linux, Python does not use odd version numbers for > development versions. Thus 2.5 is the latest production version of > Python, rather than the latest development version. I know 2.5 is a stable release; my point is that this needlessly raises the bar to build GNOME: anyone is free to build GNOME with whatever version of libc6, gcc, or python that one wants to catch some bugs (in GNOME or in these projects), but imposing the python version to be so high by default seems a gratuitous change. 3 out of 5 Ubuntu releases do not have Python 2.5 by default, no Debian release has it and the next one wont have it. -- Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On 3/13/07, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2007, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > > I'd like to suggest updating jhbuild to install Python 2.5 instead of > > 2.4 for GNOME 2.20, because: > > * I don't think Python 2.4 will continue to be maintained; > > * Distributions that will receive GNOME 2.20 will most likely make > > python 2.5 the default (ubuntu already does for GNOME 2.18); > > * We could really use the testing of GNOME on Python 2.5, especially > > on 64-bit systems. > > My understanding is that you're trying to do some Python QA in the > jhbuild moduleset, but what's the point of testing Python in GNOME? > Shouldn't the focus be on the GNOME stack instead of its dependencies? Unlike GNOME and Linux, Python does not use odd version numbers for development versions. Thus 2.5 is the latest production version of Python, rather than the latest development version. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 18:02 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > I'd like to suggest updating jhbuild to install Python 2.5 instead of > 2.4 for GNOME 2.20, because: > > * I don't think Python 2.4 will continue to be maintained; > * Distributions that will receive GNOME 2.20 will most likely make > python 2.5 the default (ubuntu already does for GNOME 2.18); > * We could really use the testing of GNOME on Python 2.5, especially > on 64-bit systems. This makes sense. I suggest you go ahead with this when the 2.20 modules are created. The release team might want to specify this as an official external dependency, but if it's not listed as one now then you can probably just go ahead. I hope that people try to #ifdef around the relevant code so that it builds with both. -- Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Ter, 2007-03-13 at 09:42 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2007, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > > I'd like to suggest updating jhbuild to install Python 2.5 instead of > > 2.4 for GNOME 2.20, because: > > * I don't think Python 2.4 will continue to be maintained; > > * Distributions that will receive GNOME 2.20 will most likely make > > python 2.5 the default (ubuntu already does for GNOME 2.18); > > * We could really use the testing of GNOME on Python 2.5, especially > > on 64-bit systems. > > My understanding is that you're trying to do some Python QA in the > jhbuild moduleset, but what's the point of testing Python in GNOME? > Shouldn't the focus be on the GNOME stack instead of its dependencies? My point is to test GNOME modules when built against (or running on top of) Python 2.5. As you know, the Python API for extensions changed substantially for python 2.5 and amd64, and I'm tired of always being the one to find all the bugs in extensions derived from this change because not many people seem to test GNOEM modules with Python 2.5 in a 64 bit system. > > (While we're at it: Debian still has Python 2.4 as default.) When the time comes for Debian to receive GNOME 2.20 packages, do you expect it to still be using Python 2.4, considering that Python 2.4 is already now deprecated upstream? -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The universe is always one step beyond logic ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > I'd like to suggest updating jhbuild to install Python 2.5 instead of > 2.4 for GNOME 2.20, because: > * I don't think Python 2.4 will continue to be maintained; > * Distributions that will receive GNOME 2.20 will most likely make > python 2.5 the default (ubuntu already does for GNOME 2.18); > * We could really use the testing of GNOME on Python 2.5, especially > on 64-bit systems. My understanding is that you're trying to do some Python QA in the jhbuild moduleset, but what's the point of testing Python in GNOME? Shouldn't the focus be on the GNOME stack instead of its dependencies? (While we're at it: Debian still has Python 2.4 as default.) -- Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 2.20 Python version
This link may be enlightening: http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.4.4/ -Joseph == On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 18:02 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > I'd like to suggest updating jhbuild to install Python 2.5 instead of > 2.4 for GNOME 2.20, because: > > * I don't think Python 2.4 will continue to be maintained; > * Distributions that will receive GNOME 2.20 will most likely make > python 2.5 the default (ubuntu already does for GNOME 2.18); > * We could really use the testing of GNOME on Python 2.5, especially > on 64-bit systems. > > Comments? > > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- joseph_sacco [at] comcast [dot] net ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
GNOME 2.20 Python version
I'd like to suggest updating jhbuild to install Python 2.5 instead of 2.4 for GNOME 2.20, because: * I don't think Python 2.4 will continue to be maintained; * Distributions that will receive GNOME 2.20 will most likely make python 2.5 the default (ubuntu already does for GNOME 2.18); * We could really use the testing of GNOME on Python 2.5, especially on 64-bit systems. Comments? -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The universe is always one step beyond logic. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
