Re: Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Donovan Baarda
G'day, Gregor's already answered most of these, but thought I'd throw in a comment or two. On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 12:11:04AM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: > On Oct 27, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: > > I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on > > http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/.

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Donovan Baarda
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 02:57:15PM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > 2.1.1 Support Only The Default Version [...] > > > + a new change to the major version of python, will make all > > > packages depending on the default version being uninstalle

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: > Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > But I don't want all my python packages to be uninstalled because > > > python changed. This is unacceptable. > > > > So you simply set the new python packages on hold, until all packages > > you need are converted. What'

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Carey Evans writes: > >From Appendix B.2: > > > The new packages will conflict with every Python dependent > > package, that does depend on `python', `python-base', without > > depending on `python (<< 1.6)' or `python-base (<< 2.1)'. > > Since the new packages conflict wi

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Jérôme Marant
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It already exists: > > deb http://ftp-master.debian.org/~doko/python ./ So, it will exist soon. > > > > s/major//. Correct. Assume we release woody with python (2.1), and we > > > > But I don't want all my python packages to be uninsta

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Carey Evans
>From Appendix B.2: > The new packages will conflict with every Python dependent > package, that does depend on `python', `python-base', without > depending on `python (<< 1.6)' or `python-base (<< 2.1)'. Since the new packages conflict with python-base itself, they don't

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 03:43:13PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > python-xml and python-newt are the only modules, that some base > packages depend on (boot-floppies and reportbug). These are both "standard" not "base" for reference, so there's no freeze worries for them yet. Cheers, aj -- Ant

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: > Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > 2.1.1 Support Only The Default Version > > > > > > + does this "Depends: python (>= X.Y), python (<< X.Y+1)" really > > > work since versioned provides do not exist yet? Isn't it > > > python-base rather than pyt

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Jérôme Marant
Gregor Hoffleit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If nobody find fundamental show-stoppers that render this unusable, > we're going to submit it to Debian Policy very soon. I think we could also add a section about how to use distutils to install things in the right place. My 2 eurocents, C

Re: Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Jérôme Marant
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > s/python-base/python/. I would prefer to keep "python-base" because it reflects that it does not contain the whole python distribution but rather the basic modules. > > - I'm not sure in 2.1.2.2 that /usr/lib/python/site-packages is a good > >

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Jérôme Marant
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > 2.1.1 Support Only The Default Version > > > > + does this "Depends: python (>= X.Y), python (<< X.Y+1)" really > > work since versioned provides do not exist yet? Isn't it > > python-base rather than python ? > > yes. python is a real pac

Re: Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Chris Lawrence writes: > - I'm not sure in 2.1.2.2 that /usr/lib/python/site-packages is a good > name... maybe /usr/share/python/site-packages instead. (After all, > the things should be arch independent.) I'd be happy to code up the > symlink thingamajig for 2.1.2.2 if nobody's working on it.

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Joel Rosdahl writes: > Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > It let's a package depend on: > > > >python (>= 2.1), python (<< 2.2), python-foo > > > > and can expect a working default Python version, which has support for > > python-foo. > > You mean > > python, python-foo >

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Joel Rosdahl
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It let's a package depend on: > >python (>= 2.1), python (<< 2.2), python-foo > > and can expect a working default Python version, which has support for > python-foo. You mean python, python-foo I presume? > My proposal would be to build 1

Re: Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Chris Lawrence writes: > On Oct 27, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: > > I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on > > http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little > > bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline > > of the Python packaging s

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Jérôme Marant writes: > Gregor Hoffleit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on > > http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little > > bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline > > of the Python

Re: Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Donovan Baarda
On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 01:38:05AM +0200, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: > I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on > http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little > bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline > of the Python packaging sys

Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Jérôme Marant
Gregor Hoffleit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on > http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little > bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline > of the Python packaging system we are installin

Re: Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-28 Thread Chris Lawrence
On Oct 27, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: > I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on > http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little > bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline > of the Python packaging system we are installing just now.

(2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-27 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline of the Python packaging system we are installing just now. Please have a look at the document, and

Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)

2001-10-27 Thread Gregor Hoffleit
I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline of the Python packaging system we are installing just now. Please have a look at the document, and