Hello,
can someone please nmu python-orbit to comply with the new python
policy? The bug is #373331. I'm too buzy, and going on vacation now.
If someone want to adopt the package, they are welcome to take it.
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.solfe
aven't. I hate distutils :-)
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Solfege - free eartraining, http://www.gnu.org/software/solfege/
Why does python2.2-dev 2.2.1-9 depend on gcc-3.2 ?
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Solfege - free eartraining, http://www.gnu.org/software/solfege/
I just uploaded a slightly updated python-gnome2 and python-gtk2
packages to http://klecker.debian.org/~tca . They are apt-get'able
using:
deb http://klecker.debian.org/~tca unstable main
deb-src http://klecker.debian.org/~tca unstable main
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, 2002-06-19 at 09:52, Roland Mas wrote:
> Also, this is a pre-RFA: if someone (possibly Tom Cato Amundsen,
> possibly someone else) wishes to adopt python-orbit, please go ahead.
> There is currently one reported bug, which has been forwarded to
> upstream. Unfortunately i
but if they depend on python2.2-gtk, they
need an sys.path.insert. Maybe this is the best. Thats why I would like
to hear peoples opinion.
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Tom Cato Am
On Sat, 2002-06-22 at 00:07, Tom Cato Amundsen wrote:
> Hello,
> ===
> 4.
> ===
> Please add..., there is probably something I have missed.
Now I remember what #4 was:
Let both python2.2-gtk and python2.2-gtk2 install into
/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages, and let the packages con
time.
I would prefer #2. I think #3 will add more confusion than it is worth.
Please comment.
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Solfege - free eartraining, http://www.gnu.org/software/solfege/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the gtk/gnome bindings.
Torsten, can we upload the packages if I spend some time to improving
them?
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Solfege - free eartraining, http://www.gnu.org/software/solfege/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "
g when I would need it.
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Solfege - free eartraining, http://www.gnu.org/software/solfege/
(>= 2.1), python (<< 2.2)
Should the policy be changed to recommend:
Depends: python (>= 2.1)
Conflicts: python (>= 2.2)
instead two deps on python? Or is two deps on python not a problem
with new dpkg, apt etc?
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Solfege - f
her bugs.
I think the new (2.1.1) license was blessed by rms... Sorry, I don't
remember where
I read this.
> released upstream before the woody freeze?
>
> Thanks, Matthias
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe
m I right?
> > what do you think?
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Solfege - free eartraining, http://www.gnu.org/software/solfege/
yone
with some clue say something about how the python2 licence and LGPL
work together? (I've got a feeling the problem is the same for
GPL and LGPL...) If nobody can answer, I'll cc: debian-legal.
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Solfege - free eartraining, http://www.gnu.org/software/solfege/
t;
> What is a possible solution? Use LGPL? Or restrict usage to Python <<2.0?
>
>
> Bastian Kleineidam
--
Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Solfege - free eartraining, http://www.gnu.org/software/solfege/
15 matches
Mail list logo
