Re: Debian Python policy & Upgrade Path (draft/proposal)
Jérôme Marant writes:
> Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de> writes:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have some questions about the upgrade procedure:
>
>
> >A. Upgrade Procedure
> >--------------------
> >
> > This section describe the procedure for the upgrade from the current
> > `python-<XXX> (1.5)' packages to the `python1.5-<XXX>' packages, the
> > removal of the `python2-<XXX>' packages and the upgrade to the recent
> > `python2.1-<XXX>' upstream packages:
> >
> > 1. File bugs against any packages that do not meet the above
> > alternatives for packages. XXX Do we allow NMUs which only fix
> > the dependencies?
> >
> > 2. Remove the python alternative from the current `python-base'
> > package. The `python-base (1.5.2)' package provides the symlink
> > to `python1.5'.
> >
> > 3. Change the description of the `python-<module> (1.5.2)' packages
> > to "Package providing Debian's default version of the
> > `python-<module>' package". Make the `python-<module> (1.5.2)'
> > packages depend on `python1.5-<module>>'.
>
>
> . Are you talking about all Python modules or the core Python modules?
the core pyton modules. If a package maintainer decides to support
more than one Python version, then he should make such a package as well.
> . I don't see why the default version should be dependant on 1.5
> rather than the latest Python
see step 4.
> . We are not allowed to mention the name of the package itself in the short
> description
s/the `python-<module>' package/this package/
> > 4. Wait until all/most bug reports filed in 1) are resolved. Note
> > that during this transition, `python1.5' is the default, so all
> > packages should be fixed to match the above scheme where
> > `python1.5' is the default. At this point we have transitioned
> > to the new scheme. The next part is using this scheme to
> > transition from 1.5 to 2.1.
> ...
> > 8. Hopefully release woody with `python2.1' or better as the default
> > Python version.
>
> . Do you mean that python-base and al. with be version 2.1 and provide
> a new symlink to /usr/bin/python2.1?
yes.
> So, it will break modules which depend on the base python right?
> Why not making 2.1 default right now ?
exactly. But you see that these packages will break when you try to
upgrade. We can't make 2.1 the default right now, because we will
_silently_ break packages. Before python can point to python2.1, we
will have to fix all packages which depend on python-base, to depend
on python-base (<< 1.6). That was my second proposal in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2001/debian-python-200110/msg00063.html
It was found, that the approach to fix the packages before the
transition would be safer.
Reply to: