Re: Proposed modification to the Python Policy

Donovan Baarda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I agree that it would be nice, but I think it can wait until there is better > Debian-wide support for clusters of workstations nfs-mounting /usr/share. As > it Sorry, but this not a good reason for not implementing this. Perl does it already

Re: Proposed modification to the Python Policy

Quoting Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Jérôme Marant writes: > > > I do propose that we install all architecture independant modules > > > in /usr/share and all architecture dependent modules in /usr/lib > > > as it has always been. [..

Re: Proposed modification to the Python Policy

Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jérôme Marant writes: > > I do propose that we install all architecture independant modules > > in /usr/share and all architecture dependent modules in /usr/lib > > as it has always been. > > assume we have a package with an architecture independ

Re: Proposed modification to the Python Policy

Jérôme Marant writes: > I do propose that we install all architecture independant modules > in /usr/share and all architecture dependent modules in /usr/lib > as it has always been. assume we have a package with an architecture independant module and an architecture dependent module. Then we

Proposed modification to the Python Policy

Hi, Since no mass uploads have happened yet, I think it is still worth changing the following. I do propose that we install all architecture independant modules in /usr/share and all architecture dependent modules in /usr/lib as it has always been. This won't break anything since th