On Sep 18, 2014, at 5:13 PM, petr <9...@ingv.it> wrote:
> Not all py24 and py25 subports have py27 equivalents. At first sight it seems
> that quite some of these are no required anymore because either part of the
> standard library (replaced_by python27 ???) or old unmaintained software. But
>
On Sep 18, 2014, at 4:48 PM, petr <9...@ingv.it> wrote:
> +1 for removing 2.4 and 2.5. I would not remove 2.6 for now. It is still well
> supported
By whom? Certainly not by upstream.
> There is also some value in having around for testing, as some very
> conservative Linux distributions still
On 17 Sep 2014, at 16:48, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:53 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>
>> As soon as they are removed from the PortIndex, they will be matched by
>> the 'obsolete' pseudo-port. You can check for installed ports that are
>> no longer in any ports tree with the
On Sep 18, 2014, at 4:58 PM, petr <9...@ingv.it> wrote:
> On 17 Sep 2014, at 03:43, Ned Deily wrote:
Ned didn't say this; I did.
>> Please don't create new py24, py25, py31, and py32 subports from now on. I'd
>> like to phase out and remove python{26,27,31,32} in the near future.
>
> Is there
On 17 Sep 2014, at 03:43, Ned Deily wrote:
> Please don't create new py24, py25, py31, and py32 subports from now on. I'd
> like to phase out and remove python{26,27,31,32} in the near future.
>
Is there a typo here? Should this read `... remove python{24,25,31,32} in the
near future.` ?
~pe
Hi all,
I already wanted to make a similar proposal (at least for py24) so I am in
favour of this proposal.
+1 for removing 2.4 and 2.5. I would not remove 2.6 for now. It is still well
supported and py26 subports are in general easier to maintain. There is also
some value in having around fo
On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:53 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
> As soon as they are removed from the PortIndex, they will be matched by
> the 'obsolete' pseudo-port. You can check for installed ports that are
> no longer in any ports tree with the command 'port echo obsolete'. This
> also works with 'port un
In article <987e50bd-3eb4-4fe3-bf08-29c3f7916...@macports.org>,
Lawrence Velazquez
wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2014, at 1:30 AM, Clemens Lang
> wrote:
> > If I were you, I'd set a timeout and if nobody argues that we should keep
> > them
> > for a good reason, delete them once the timeout has passed
On 2014-9-17 04:23 , Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> My problem with python24 and python25 (aside from having to maintain dead
> software) is that they aren't framework installations, making them even more
> of a pain to deal with. Note the 2.4/2.5-specific logic in python-1.0, for
> example. python
Lawrence Velázquez writes:
> On Sep 16, 2014, at 1:30 AM, Clemens Lang wrote:
>
>> If I were you, I'd set a timeout and if nobody argues that we should keep
>> them
>> for a good reason, delete them once the timeout has passed. Probably ask
>> -users,
>> too.
>
> I like this.
>
>> While we're
On Sep 16, 2014, at 1:30 AM, Clemens Lang wrote:
> If I were you, I'd set a timeout and if nobody argues that we should keep them
> for a good reason, delete them once the timeout has passed. Probably ask
> -users,
> too.
I like this.
> While we're at it, isn't 2.6 unsupported as well?
Yes, a
Frank Schima writes:
> On Sep 15, 2014, at 7:56 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to adapt Ned Deily's patches for Yosemite[1] to the Python ports.
>> Adapting them to all the Python 3.x ports was tedious enough, but now I've
>> made it to Python 2.4 and 2.5. I feel like I'm slappi
On Sep 15, 2014, at 7:56 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> I'm trying to adapt Ned Deily's patches for Yosemite[1] to the Python ports.
> Adapting them to all the Python 3.x ports was tedious enough, but now I've
> made it to Python 2.4 and 2.5. I feel like I'm slapping bandages onto
> patients
On 16/set/2014, at 03:56, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> I'm trying to adapt Ned Deily's patches for Yosemite[1] to the Python ports.
> Adapting them to all the Python 3.x ports was tedious enough, but now I've
> made it to Python 2.4 and 2.5. I feel like I'm slapping bandages onto
> patients who
On 2014-09-16 10:44, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> (Once again it would be nice to automatically uninstall all the
> py24-foo ports, but I don't know how to do that and I don't consider
> it to be a showstopper if we don't find an elegant solution soon.)
As soon as they are removed from the PortIndex, t
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Christoph Deil
wrote:
>
> On 16 Sep 2014, at 07:44, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Clemens Lang wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> - On 16 Sep, 2014, at 03:56, Lawrence Velázquez lar...@macports.org
>>> wrote:
>>>
Is there some overwhelm
On 16 Sep 2014, at 07:44, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Clemens Lang wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> - On 16 Sep, 2014, at 03:56, Lawrence Velázquez lar...@macports.org
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there some overwhelmingly good reason we still provide these, given that
>>> 2.7
>>>
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Clemens Lang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> - On 16 Sep, 2014, at 03:56, Lawrence Velázquez lar...@macports.org wrote:
>
>> Is there some overwhelmingly good reason we still provide these, given that
>> 2.7
>> is still alive and kicking? Can we please stop providing them?
>
Hi,
- On 16 Sep, 2014, at 03:56, Lawrence Velázquez lar...@macports.org wrote:
> Is there some overwhelmingly good reason we still provide these, given that
> 2.7
> is still alive and kicking? Can we please stop providing them?
If I were you, I'd set a timeout and if nobody argues that we s
I'm trying to adapt Ned Deily's patches for Yosemite[1] to the Python ports.
Adapting them to all the Python 3.x ports was tedious enough, but now I've made
it to Python 2.4 and 2.5. I feel like I'm slapping bandages onto patients who
have been brain-dead for 5.74 and 3.31 years, respectively.
20 matches
Mail list logo
