On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 22:58 +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> zope2.9 is simply still sitting in NEW, and is not rejected. I see there
> was a clarification requested over the weekend about the big number of
> zope versions in the archive (2.9 would be the 4th), and Fabio replied.
> This was tw
On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 10:32:28PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Jeroen van Wolffelaar writes:
> > > Unfortunately FTP masters did reject the Zope2.x upload, which uses
> > > python2.4. Any reasons for that? Zope2.7 already was scheduled for
> > > removal.
> >
> > Can you please be more specific?
Jeroen van Wolffelaar writes:
> > Unfortunately FTP masters did reject the Zope2.x upload, which uses
> > python2.4. Any reasons for that? Zope2.7 already was scheduled for
> > removal.
>
> Can you please be more specific? And/or reply to the REJECT mail, as it
> states at the bottom of every reje
On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 04:33:35PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Jeroen van Wolffelaar writes:
> > On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 12:41:13AM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > > So, because there were no objections to the python 2.1/2.2 removal,
> > > I'll be proceeding with that.
> >
> > Done now,
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Matthias Klose wrote:
> ok, I did run out of time last weekend, however python2.5,
> python2.3-doc, python2.4-doc are in NEW. According your logic about
> vacation times, the change of the default version probably should not
> be done before Easter.
Easter is 4 days or a full
Jeroen van Wolffelaar writes:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 12:41:13AM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > So, because there were no objections to the python 2.1/2.2 removal,
> > I'll be proceeding with that.
>
> Done now, I'd like to announce this, together with some warning about
> default pytho
On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 12:41:13AM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> So, because there were no objections to the python 2.1/2.2 removal,
> I'll be proceeding with that.
Done now, I'd like to announce this, together with some warning about
default python version changes, if they're going to hap
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:49:52PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Jeroen van Wolffelaar writes:
> > The first freezes are already closing in fast,
>
> did I miss something? There's no update since
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/10/msg4.html
We're roughly 16 weeks from th
Matthias Klose wrote:
> Jeroen van Wolffelaar writes:
> > The first freezes are already closing in fast,
>
> did I miss something? There's no update since
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/10/msg4.html
Yes. At least the January, 3rd one
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-deve
> decompyle2.2 has an unsatisfied build-dependency: python2.2-dev
This is a legacy package, and it requires python 2.2 (it will not work
with 2.3 or newer). I have just filed an ftp.d.o bug asking for it to
be removed. Users should have no problem switching to the newer decompyle
package instea
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:38:43PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> I've already re-built these two packages, removing 2.1 and 2.2 support
> and adding 2.4. However, I've been unable to find a sponsor.
Thanks everyone for the suggestions. Will update the bug reports later
today with the relevant informa
Jeroen van Wolffelaar writes:
> The first freezes are already closing in fast,
did I miss something? There's no update since
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/10/msg4.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006, Iustin Pop wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:33:11PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > python-pylibacl has an unsatisfied build-dependency: python2.2-dev
> > python-pyxattr has an unsatisfied build-dependency: python2.2-dev
>
> I've already re-built these two packages,
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:38:43PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:33:11PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > python-pylibacl has an unsatisfied build-dependency: python2.2-dev
> > python-pyxattr has an unsatisfied build-dependency: python2.2-dev
>
> I've already re-buil
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:33:11PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> python-pylibacl has an unsatisfied build-dependency: python2.2-dev
> python-pyxattr has an unsatisfied build-dependency: python2.2-dev
I've already re-built these two packages, removing 2.1 and 2.2 support
and adding 2.4. How
On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 12:33 +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> zopeinterface has an unsatisfied build-dependency: python2.2-dev
This package can be removed, pythonX-zopeinterface are now built
from zope3 source package.
--
Fabio Tranchitella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.''`.
P
Hi all,
It's been quite a while, but 2.1 and to a slightly lesser extend, 2.2
are really obsolete now. One of the issues with 2.1 and 2.2 are that
they don't build on amd64, and are holding up a whole chain of packages
also.
Therefore, I'd like to remove python 2.1 and 2.2 as soon as possible,
li
17 matches
Mail list logo
