Re: Status of the python-dev task
David Coe wrote:
> There are/were a minor bugs against the task-python-* packages in
> unstable, all due to broken dependencies; those are easy to fix, but
> are one of the things that drove us away from the old task-* packages,
> as I understand it.
Yep. It's not the end of the world in the new system if a task lists a
package that no longer exists. It may slightly break the task, but it is
handled gracefully. Tasks can also refer to packages that are only in
non-us and they will continue to work even if the system doesn't have a
source for non-us.
> I had also planned to create a parallel set of task-python2-*
> packages, as a result of brief discussion on debian-python, and
> can still do that if task-python[2]-* packages are still desired.
>
> task-python-dev, in particular, is probably not very useful; we had
> discussed the pros and cons of having that, on the debian-python list
> when task-* packages were first created, and decided to (iirc) go
> ahead and create it to see if anyone uses it. My guess is we
> could drop that one and no one would complain.
>
> Joey, what *should* happen with these task-[python-]* packages?
> Should I bring them up to date for sid? for woody? What should
> I read (e.g. where are the following guidelines)?
See tasks/README in tasksel's source.
We do have a few other -dev tasks, and I think it can be sorta useful to
get a task that lets you get started quickly on using a particular
langage. (In particular, the c-dev task should also let you build most
any program you run accross.) At the same time, I do think they're
amoung the shakier of the tasks we have now (expecially fortran-dev!).
I'm not sure what these pthon2-* tasks are intended to do or why
you think more than one task is needed in this area.
--
see shy jo
Reply to: