El lun, 10-07-2017 a las 11:55 -0500, William Hubbs escribió:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 01:04:10PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > Looking to the list of packages still not supporting python 3.5:
> > https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/34-to-35.txt
> >
> > and considering
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:41:04 +0200
Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 07/10/2017 03:35 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 13:43:43 +0200
> > Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, but it's similar as the cases when we need to fix our packages
> >> to
On 11 Jul 2017 01:41, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>
> On 07/10/2017 03:35 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 13:43:43 +0200
> > Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, but it's similar as the cases when we need to fix our packages
> >> to work with
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:55:30 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 01:04:10PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > Looking to the list of packages still not supporting python 3.5:
> > https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/34-to-35.txt
> >
> >
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 01:04:10PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Hello
>
> Looking to the list of packages still not supporting python 3.5:
> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/34-to-35.txt
>
> and considering that we should even start testing python 3.6, I think it would
> be nice if
On 10/07/17 12:43, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El lun, 10-07-2017 a las 13:12 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand escribió:
>> On 07/10/2017 01:04 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>>> Any issues on trying to go further into implementing this warning?
>> Not an issue per se, but it should be pointed out that python 3.5
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 7:04 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> Looking to the list of packages still not supporting python 3.5:
> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/34-to-35.txt
>
I realize a warning will address most of the issue, but when creating
lists like these it can
On 07/10/2017 03:35 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 13:43:43 +0200
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
>> Yes, but it's similar as the cases when we need to fix our packages
>> to work with a newer library they depend on. In this case it would be
>> even easier as we can have
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 13:43:43 +0200
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Yes, but it's similar as the cases when we need to fix our packages
> to work with a newer library they depend on. In this case it would be
> even easier as we can have multiple python versions and switch to the
> newer
El lun, 10-07-2017 a las 13:12 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand escribió:
> On 07/10/2017 01:04 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Any issues on trying to go further into implementing this warning?
>
> Not an issue per se, but it should be pointed out that python 3.5 only
> has a testing visibility, so this
On 07/10/2017 01:04 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Any issues on trying to go further into implementing this warning?
Not an issue per se, but it should be pointed out that python 3.5 only
has a testing visibility, so this at the very least requires maintainers
to potentially have a separate testing
Hello
Looking to the list of packages still not supporting python 3.5:
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/34-to-35.txt
and considering that we should even start testing python 3.6, I think it would
be nice if we could make portage to warn when PYTHON_COMPAT value is not
updated. It's
12 matches
Mail list logo