Bug#243291: marked as done (Discussion about the python-policy-draft)

[owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System)]

Your message dated Mon, 02 Oct 2006 15:54:31 -0500
with message-id <87u02mxwu0.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
and subject line Bug#243291: Discussion about the python-policy-draft
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--- Begin Message ---

• To: submit@bugs.debian.org
• Subject: Discussion about the python-policy-draft
• From: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>
• Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 11:08:30 +0200
• Message-id: <20040412090830.GG24306@mails.so.argh.org>

Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.6.1.0
Severity: wishlist

Hi,

there was more than one discussion about the Debian Python policy
draft, http://people.debian.org/~joss/python/python-policy-draft.txt

I try to summerize the different discussion we had about it:

- "makes transitions of new versions of python into testing a
  screaming nightmare" - see
  http://groups.google.de/groups?selm=1aXSL-6Dn-3%40gated-at.bofh.it
  for this statement of Colin Watson
  (The same is valid for backporting a single python application to
  stable.)

- the document recommends forward conflicts quite too often. Forward
  conflicts should be avoided. I can't e.g. see for myself why an
  simple application like imediff2 or moosic (or many others) needs to
  conflict with python >= 2.4.

I hope that I spotted out the most discussed issues, and I hope that
we are able together to solve these problems.




Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

--- End Message ---

--- Begin Message ---

• To: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>
• Cc: 243291-done@bugs.debian.org
• Subject: Re: Bug#243291: Discussion about the python-policy-draft
• From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
• Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 15:54:31 -0500
• Message-id: <87u02mxwu0.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
• In-reply-to: <20040412090830.GG24306@mails.so.argh.org> (Andreas Barth's message of "Mon\, 12 Apr 2004 11\:08\:30 +0200")
• References: <20040412090830.GG24306@mails.so.argh.org>

Hi,

        I do not think that the python policy is in a state fit for
 inclusion in the main policy. When it gets there, we can try again.

        manoj
-- 
April is the cruellest month... Thomas Stearns Eliot
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

--- End Message ---