On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 15:24, Bruce Sass wrote: > > On Tue, 6 Jan 2004, John Goerzen wrote: > > There are a lot of Python packages and Python modules in Debian that > > have counter-productive dependencies. > > > > Not only that, but Python policy tends to encourage such behavior > > (section 3.2, for instance.) > > The section says that if you need a particular version of Python you > must explicitly use that version. Reads like "common sense" to me. However, if you read 3.1.1, it also says you must depend on a specific Python version, *even if your modules are completely private*. > It sounds like the problem is with how the dependencies are being > handled, and not with the existence of multiple versions of Python. The problem is a combination of Debian's Python policy, and Python's piss-poor autogeneration of compiled files. > If > the logic of the policy is sound and well expressed but also awkward, > counterintuitive, difficult to implement manually, etc., then it > should be codified (literally, along the lines of make-kpkg, with > dh_make's help, ???) Policy has been codified in dh_python. That doesn't make the policy less braindead. -- Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part