[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Re: RFS: uwsgi

  OFF: I wasn't subscribed to debian-mentors (before sending this
message) and had to answer through clicking mailto link on
debian-mentors archive page [1] and copying/pasting text from mentioned
page. Hope, I clicked right link and answered in right thread.

> uwsgi-python2.5 - fast, self-healing, developer-friendly WSGI server
> (Python 2.5)
> uwsgi-python2.6 - fast, self-healing, developer-friendly WSGI server
> (Python 2.6)
> uwsgi-python3.1 - Fast, self-healing, developer-friendly WSGI server
> (Python 3.1)
> Please build a single package for all Python 2.X, and a single one for all Python 3.X. (Unless you want people who take care of Python transitions to hate you.)

  This is could be done. But before doing this, I want to clear up my
original decision.

  uWSGI binary is linked with Python library (libpython), because it
embeds whole interpreter and serves Python sources with it's own
embedded interpreter. As I want to provide uWSGI for all Python version
available in Debian repository, I've built three separate packages,
which are linked with three separate libraries (libpython2.5,
libpython2.6 and libpython3.1).

  If I'll build one package for Python2.X (say, uwsgi-python2), it'll be
ought to including two uWSGI binary (uwsgi-python2.5 and
uwsgi-python2.6) and be dependent on two Python libraries (libpython2.5
and libpython2.6). And these libraries are dependent on correspondent
python packages (python2.5 and python2.6).

  So, this single package uwsgi-python2 will be (indirectly) dependent
on python2.5 and python2.6 at the same time.

  I think, user will be confused when in process of installing package
uwsgi-python2, all available Python 2.X versions will be also installed.

  Does it makes your advice arguable?

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2010/12/msg00333.html

Reply to: