On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 07:54:27AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> X-P-V only ever refers to Python versions, never Python 3 versions.
> There's X-Python3-Version for that. It's safe and correct to remove
> the << 2.8.
Thank you!
Kind regards,
--Toni++
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-pyth
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 01:09:55PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Toni Mueller , 2012-06-18, 12:55:
> >debian/control:
> >...
> >X-Python-Version: >= 2.5, << 2.8
>
> In any case, I'd get rid of the "<< 2.8" part. Surely roundup cannot
&
Hi,
I'm trying to build the new roundup package with dh_python2. That is
the right thing to do, right?
I get this:
... lots of output (DH_VERBOSE=1), then:
D: dh_python2:584: processing package roundup...
D: dh_python2:464: package roundup details = {'requires.txt': set([]),
'shebangs': set([
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:56:36AM +0100, Thomas Kluyver wrote:
> On 6 June 2012 11:51, Toni Mueller wrote:
> > Since some time, it's Plone
> > 4.[01] that requires Python 2.6. Only the still-in-beta Plone 4.2
> > even works with Python 2.7 (but 2.6 is still s
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 10:27:39AM +0900, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
> Toni Mueller writes:
> >> +1. Time to retire Python 2.6. From Bernd's reply it sounds like
> >> the Zope upgrade needn't block this.
> >
> > please DON'T!
> >
Hi,
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 05:28:08PM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> You can make and then support a private repo with python2.6 based on the
> last Debian release.
yes, I can. :/
I actually did something like this to get 2.6 in Lenny.
> If you expect official Debian support (including se
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 06:43:23PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jan 04, 2012, at 01:58 PM, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> >After switching python-defaults to python2.7, I'm not sure we discussed
> >whether to keep python2.6 for Wheezy or not. In theory, we should be able to
> >get rid of python2
Hi Andriy,
On Tue, 31.05.2011 at 14:59:25 +0300, Andriy Senkovych
wrote:
> I'm an uploader of the buildbot and buildbot-slave Debian packages and
> a contributor to the buildbot project[1] itself. As you may wonder,
> buildbot is a distributed continious integration tool written in
> Python. An
Ok, flogging the dead horse once more:
On Wed, 09.03.2011 at 11:11:35 -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mar 09, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> >in my experience, in contrast to bzr (but that was 1-2 years ago, since
> >then those projects switched to GIT), it was also "robustness"
Hi Steve,
On Sun, 06.03.2011 at 14:18:40 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> AIUI Scott is talking here about the ease of transitioning an svn user to
> bzr because of the similarity of the command model, not about using either
> git or bzr to access the current svn repo.
I was talking about the rob
Hi,
On Sun, 06.03.2011 at 13:33:45 -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mar 06, 2011, at 05:43 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> >Do the 2 VCDs you mentioned have clear advantage that make then
> >preferible to git except being Python-based? If so, I think it's a
> >quite weak reason.
>
> Let me turn that ar
Hi,
On Sun, 06.03.2011 at 16:01:04 -0500, Scott Kitterman
wrote:
> With bzr the transition from svn is a little easier than that. Almost any
> svn
> command you would use, the same command works with bzr, e.g. svn co and bzr
> co.
I can confirm that bzr-svn works much more smoothly than gi
Hi,
On Mon, 27.09.2010 at 00:10:35 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Yes, and? We will have Python2.5 in Lenny thanks to your own fault of starting
> the transition more than half a year too late. Please don't start to create a
> mess now.
I'm not sure I understand. Maybe s/Lenny/Squeeze/?
Kind r
Hi,
one more data point:
On Mon, 09.08.2010 at 16:38:07 +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
> I'm very hesitant to upload a package that I cannot install locally,
> but would really like to see this version in the archive.
for kicks, I installed this package on my Testing workstation w/o a
Hi,
On Mon, 09.08.2010 at 16:09:48 +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
> On Mon, 09.08.2010 at 15:48:18 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > > http://download.oeko.net/sw/misc/funkload/
> > Drop ", << 3.0" from XS-Python-Version. It's not needed and confuses
> > pyt
rol file now
reads:
Package: funkload
Version: 1.13.0-1
Architecture: all
Maintainer: Toni Mueller
Installed-Size: 860
Depends: python (>= 2.4), python-support (>= 0.90.0), python-pkg-resources,
python-webunit (>= 1:1.3.10)
Recommends: tcpwatch-httpproxy, gnuplot (>= 4.2), python-docu
Hi Jakub,
On Mon, 09.08.2010 at 14:50:03 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Toni Mueller , 2010-08-09, 14:00:
> >But trying to actually install the package on a machine running
> >Sid, current as of today, fails:
>
> Could you share your source package with us? Or at least post
Hi,
while packaging a new version of funkload and trying to convert the
packaging to the new 3.0 format, I have now arrived at a package that
should work. At least, superficially inspecting the package's contents
does not reveal any errors, as does running lintian (the package is
almost lintian-c
Hi Jakub,
thanks for taking the effort to tour the code!
On Tue, 03.08.2010 at 19:18:27 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Toni Mueller
>roundup
should be fixed in 1.4.15-2, just uploaded.
Kind regards,
--Toni++
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
Hi,
On Fri, 16.07.2010 at 10:03:24 +1000, Brian May
wrote:
> python path, and then karaage can import then using "import
> karaage.conf.settings" for example. Use of dist-utils and cdbs makes
> the debian/rules file very simple.
>
> However, from the point of view of the package, it would be
Hi,
On Thu, 15.07.2010 at 16:50:02 -0400, Michael Mulich wrote:
> So I'm fairly stuck at this point, but I'm not giving up. I'm going
> to package plone no matter how many times it kicks me in the head
> (or at least until brain damage ensues). Any one else feel like
> joining me? :)
I didn't r
Hi,
On Wed, 21.04.2010 at 06:46:27 +0200, Fabio Tranchitella
wrote:
> I'm definitely interested in co-maintaining the backport (and using my own
> backport in production already). I'll have a look at the packages from
> Toni, and see the difference with my own backport.
FWIW, I've just updated
Hi,
On Wed, 23.06.2010 at 19:49:04 +0200, Fabio Tranchitella
wrote:
> I personally use the unified installer with the system-wide python, using
> --with-python; if you have system-wide python packages you don't want to
> expose to the UI, you can use virtenv.
well... that's a near miss.
Maybe
Hi,
On Wed, 21.04.2010 at 06:46:27 +0200, Fabio Tranchitella
wrote:
> * 2010-04-21 01:17, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > I think Fabio (kob...@d.o) also wanted to / is working on a backport,
> > might make sense to co-maintain that with him. CCed him :)
>
> I'm definitely interested in co-maintaining
On Tue, 11.05.2010 at 00:23:55 +0200, Piotr O??arowski wrote:
> [Toni Mueller, 2010-05-10]
> > PS: The address "www.griffith.cc" that you mention in your .sig, does
> > not resolve, and afair, Berlios is not a good project host.
>
> To which IP your DNS point
On Mon, 10.05.2010 at 21:17:40 +0200, Piotr O??arowski wrote:
> [Toni Mueller, 2010-05-10]
> > problem. It's their choice to deviate from Debian packaging, so why
> > shouldn't it be also their problem (not ours) if they break stuff, too?
> changes in Python inter
Hi Piotr,
On Mon, 10.05.2010 at 13:23:01 +0200, Piotr O??arowski wrote:
> derivatives what to do, though. I'd never complain in public and would
> let you do whatever you want (that's derivative's right after all)... if
> Ubuntu's decisions would not have so strong impact on us - when I'm
than
Hi anatoly,
On Sat, 08.05.2010 at 07:41:05 +0300, anatoly techtonik
wrote:
> three are used even though only one is default. But there is no
> Python2.6 even in backports on Lenny and I need it for python-expect,
> to automate my stuff. This also requires explanation to refer people
> when they
Hi Piotr,
On Sat, 08.05.2010 at 14:33:39 +0200, Piotr O??arowski wrote:
> [Toni Mueller, 2010-05-08]
> > On Sat, 08.05.2010 at 10:55:40 +0200, Piotr O??arowski
> > wrote:
> > > [anatoly techtonik, 2010-05-08]
> > > > Why not use virtualenv for Packag
Hi,
On Sat, 08.05.2010 at 10:55:40 +0200, Piotr O??arowski wrote:
> [anatoly techtonik, 2010-05-08]
> > Why not use virtualenv for Packaging applications?
>
> Every single DD understands that shipping two copies of the same file is
> one too many.
actually, I don't.
Virtualenv has been a lif
Hi,
I forgot to ask what'd be the best way to go forward for Plonistas?
I really think that there should be some time for Plonistas to upgrade,
which the current scheme does not allow for.
I see the following options:
* Compile everything from source, including Python 2.4
So far, Debian's P
Hi,
On Tue, 27.04.2010 at 15:42:45 +0200, Fabio Tranchitella
wrote:
> The current stable release of Plone requires python2.4 and Zope2.10, which
> we cannot support in squeeze. I see no way to really support them, so I'd
> prefer to have the packages removed.
from my point of view, only Python
Hi,
unfortunately, I've missed decision to remove Python2.4 from Debian,
but the result is that Zope2.10, required for Plone 3.x, will not run
on Squeeze anymore, and that the zope2.10 package from sid is now
completely uninstallable.
Even installing Zope from upstream's source, imho "the" recom
Hi,
On Tue, 30.03.2010 at 18:51:48 +0200, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 17:00, Hermann Lauer
> wrote:
> > probably this is not the right place, but knows anybody of
> > a way to build .deb packacks for python 2.6 on lenny ?
>
> The usually right move would be to write to the pac
Hi,
I have to make a small correction:
On Thu, 14.01.2010 at 10:44:53 +0100, Toni Mueller wrote:
> * Newer versions of Zope 2, starting with 2.12, afair require Python
> 2.6.
Zope 2.12 requires a recent Python 2.5, but Plone 4.0, running on top
of Zope 2.12, requires Python 2.6.
Sor
Hi,
On Tue, 12.01.2010 at 13:44:28 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 12:21:34PM +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote:
> > The information is there, it is unfortunately just well hidden:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2009/12/msg00207.html
>
> Ahh, that's a good catch. I
Hi,
while trying to backport Python 2.6 to Lenny, I discovered that it
conflicts with python-xml, which is required by several other packages
in conjunction with earlier versions of Python.
I don't understand why this module has to conflict, though, but rather
see this conflict as an artifact of
Hi,
while I was trying to play with the upcoming Plone 4.0, which is
technically vastly different from earlier releases, I found out that
recent versions, or at least trunk, of Zope 2.12, appears to absolutely
require Python 2.6. Or at least that's the way Andreas Jung, the Zope2
release manager,
Hi,
On Sun, 04.10.2009 at 00:00:16 +0200, Jonas Meurer
wrote:
> thus we need to migrate our debian/rules to build zope2.12 with the help
> of buildout, whether we like it or not. unfortunately buildout seems to
> be a real pain for building distribution packages. it hardcodes absolute
> pathna
Hi,
On Mon, 21.09.2009 at 12:13:46 +0200, Wolodja Wentland
wrote:
> Hmmm, no. Python applications that need a specific version of Python
> should use
>
> #!/usr/bin/env pythonX.Y
>
> or
>
> #!/usr/bin/pythonX.Y
>
> stating that they need this specific version of Python.
how else is
Hi,
On Mon, 21.09.2009 at 01:54:13 +0200, W. Martin Borgert
wrote:
> for some reasons I need lenny backports of python-django,
I could make use of python-django 1.1 in Lenny. Until I have a
backport, I'll need to install it locally.
> Is someone interested in doing the backports? :~)
I brief
On Wed, 26.08.2009 at 20:18:45 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Toni Mueller wrote:
> > What's the right way to fix this, please?
> No real idea, but I'd give python-support a try. Often it just works then...
I hoped to be able to postpone this effort for a while, but yes,
p
Hi,
On Wed, 26.08.2009 at 19:50:42 +0200, Nicolas François
wrote:
> Is there already a goal to drop python2.4 in Squeeze?
I really hope that it isn't!
Not that I'm a special fan of Python 2.4, but afaik there's no way to
run Zope 2.x, and that includes most prominently Plone, on newer
version
Hi,
while trying to fix my packaging, I found that my recent python-webunit
package doesn't install cleanly. dpkg reports that the package be
installed ("ii"), but I'd still like to get rid of the disconcerting
error messages:
# dpkg -i python-webunit_1.3.8-4_all.deb
Selecting previously desele
44 matches
Mail list logo
