On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 12:31:23PM +0100, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote:
> Op Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 05:52:21AM + schreef Danial Behzadi دانیال بهزادی:
> > Does it worth trying to package pyenv for Debian? Ain't it against any
> > rules?
>
> See "ITP pyenv" @ http://bugs.debian.org/978149 .
Oh,
Hi Joost (2023.02.07_11:31:23_+)
> Op Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 05:52:21AM + schreef Danial Behzadi دانیال بهزادی:
> > Does it worth trying to package pyenv for Debian? Ain't it against any
> > rules?
>
> See "ITP pyenv" @ http://bugs.debian.org/978149 .
I think the Python development
Op Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 05:52:21AM + schreef Danial Behzadi دانیال بهزادی:
> Does it worth trying to package pyenv for Debian? Ain't it against any rules?
See "ITP pyenv" @ http://bugs.debian.org/978149 .
Bye,
Joost
--
Joost van Baal-Ilić http://abramowitz.uvt.nl/
Does it worth trying to package pyenv for Debian? Ain't it against any rules?
Hi Andrey,
On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 11:53:33AM +0100, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 01:50:34PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > Our social contract #4 says "Our priorities are our users and free
> > software". What benefits would having the python3.10 base packages in
> >
On 2/5/23 14:50, Julian Gilbey wrote:
Our social contract #4 says "Our priorities are our users and free
software".
In a Debian thread, invoking the social contract #4, is like owning a
goodwin point. It suggests that the opponent is trying to do something
against the Debian users, which is
On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 01:50:34PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Our social contract #4 says "Our priorities are our users and free
> software". What benefits would having the python3.10 base packages in
> bookworm bring for our users (as I point out, for some users, this is
> a necessity) and
On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 02:41:08PM +, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Julian (2023.02.05_10:38:23_+)
>
> > Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in
> > bookworm?
>
> Because we aim to have a single Python release supported in every stable
> release.
I am not
Hi Julian (2023.02.05_10:38:23_+)
> Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in
> bookworm?
Because we aim to have a single Python release supported in every stable
release.
> I was trying to run some experiments in a virtual environment a few
> days ago, and it turns
Our social contract #4 says "Our priorities are our users and free
software". What benefits would having the python3.10 base packages in
bookworm bring for our users (as I point out, for some users, this is
a necessity) and what disadvantages would it bring (none that I can
think of)? Why would
How about fixing the 3.11 issues if you hit them ? How about using Buster and
3.9 if 3.11 doesn't work (yet) for you ?
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
On Feb 5, 2023 11:38, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>
> Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in
> bookworm?
>
> I was trying to run
Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in
bookworm?
I was trying to run some experiments in a virtual environment a few
days ago, and it turns out that several of the Python packages I
needed do not yet run on Python 3.11. I was saved by being able to
run in a Python
12 matches
Mail list logo
