2011/2/4 Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net>: > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Elliot Murphy <ell...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Barry Warsaw <ba...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >>> If necessary, we can solve the LTS upgrade problem similar to the way we >>> solved it for Lucid; we create an official PPA with Python 2.6 and port over >>> the stack required by services such as Launchpad. 3rd parties still >>> requiring >>> Python 2.6, could create their own PPA, dependent on ours, and add whatever >>> packages they need to the former. >> This seems like a perfectly reasonable solution for launchpad and >> other server apps. We wouldn't normally upgrade the data center >> servers to a non-LTS release like Natty anyway, and I believe this is >> the approach used in many data centers. > Indeed, we'd discussed at the rally; and from a LP perspective, a PPA > with 2.7 in it for Lucid is actually the thing we want most. That will > let us prepare for the next LTS now.
I'm rather intrigued by this idea. I just don't completely understand how you deal with the cases where a python package in Lucid isn't compatible with 2.7, yet specifices compatiblity with e.g. >= 2.5. As I understand it, any such package will prevent installation of the python2.7 package (since it will fail to bytecompile for 2.7)? If this was done for Lucid, how were these situations handled? Pushing fixed versions of the offending package to the PPA with a stricter Python version setting? -- Soren Hansen | http://linux2go.dk/ Ubuntu Developer | http://www.ubuntu.com/ OpenStack Developer | http://www.openstack.org/ -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
