On 18 November 2014 16:31, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com wrote:
That does sound like a friendly fork, so I think taking over the package
name
for Stretch would be appropriate, but in the meantime, it should stay in
experimental in case a bug fix is needed for the current package for
On 5 November 2014 12:11, Collin Anderson cmawebs...@gmail.com wrote:
There might be a problem because it looks like it conflicts with
python-mysqldb.
Yes, it's a 100% compatible fork intended to replace python-mysqldb. Same
python package name and everything. We could decide to only include
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:55:57 +1100 Brian May br...@microcomaustralia.com.au
wrote:
On 5 November 2014 12:11, Collin Anderson cmawebs...@gmail.com wrote:
There might be a problem because it looks like it conflicts with
python-mysqldb.
Yes, it's a 100% compatible fork intended to replace
On 18 November 2014 15:05, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com wrote:
I'd suggest not just replacing it. How about call your package python-
mysqlclient (as you had originally intended I believe) and have it conflict
with python-mysqldb (since they both provide the same interface, conflicts
On 18 November 2014 15:05, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com wrote:
[...] Maintainers can decide which they prefer and [...]
On second thoughts, me thinks this may not be as easy as you suggest. :-(
i.e. if package XYZ changes to depend on python-mysqlclient, it is going to
conflict with
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:24:45 +1100 Brian May br...@microcomaustralia.com.au
wrote:
On 18 November 2014 15:05, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com wrote:
[...] Maintainers can decide which they prefer and [...]
On second thoughts, me thinks this may not be as easy as you suggest. :-(
On 18 November 2014 15:40, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com wrote:
Is the original development inactive? I think it would be at least
somewhat
anti-social to switch to a non-friendly fork (no idea if that's relevant
here). What are the circumstances around the fork. I think that's at
On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 04:02:14 PM Brian May wrote:
On 18 November 2014 15:40, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com wrote:
Is the original development inactive? I think it would be at least
somewhat
anti-social to switch to a non-friendly fork (no idea if that's relevant
here).
Hi Brian,
Thanks so much.
There might be a problem because it looks like it conflicts with
python-mysqldb.
Yes, it's a 100% compatible fork intended to replace python-mysqldb. Same
python package name and everything. We could decide to only include it for
python3, or we could even have this
9 matches
Mail list logo
