Re: (2nd try) Final draft of Python Policy (hopefully ;-)
Gregor Hoffleit <gregor@hoffleit.de> writes:
> I've put a version 0.3.6 of the Python Policy Draft on
> http://people.debian.org/~flight/python/. The version is still a little
> bit rough and sometimes incomplete, but it already gives a good outline
> of the Python packaging system we are installing just now.
>
> Please have a look at the document, and post all fundamental problems
> you have with the content.
I've asked some questions to Matthias in private yesterday because I
didn't have enough time to follow all recent threads and question.
So, some of the questions may have already been asked.
2.1.1 Support Only The Default Version
+ does this "Depends: python (>= X.Y), python (<< X.Y+1)" really
work since versioned provides do not exist yet? Isn't it
python-base rather than python ?
+ a new change to the major version of python, will make all
packages depending on the default version being uninstalled, right?
If so, I don't think it is the Right Thing.
+ I think that "Depends: python<X>.<Y>" would work better and avoid
breaking things.
+ Do we really need to use python-base and al. packages except for
the transtion?
Or maybe for python version independent modules?
+ Mainly I don't see the reason for this "support for default version"
case.
2.1.3
1.
+ Is pythonX.Y-module the same thing as python-api defined by Neil?
+ I don't see the need for a "default package python-<foo>" there
What for is it meant to be used?
Now, the concrete case of python-xml. If I also want to ship a version for 1.5.
If I undestood correctly the document, I'll have this :
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
python2.1-xml
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.3-7), python2.1-base, python2.1-xmlbase
python-xml
Depends: python (>= 2.1), python (<< 2.2), python2.1-module
[I guess that some dependancies are missing there, but i'm following the
document.
Maybe adding python2.1-xml?
]
python1.5-xml
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.3-7), python1.5-base
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Have all these packages to be built with the same source?
>
> If nobody find fundamental show-stoppers that render this unusable,
> we're going to submit it to Debian Policy very soon.
I think that we should include a section about maintainers scripts
for python modules.
Thanks.
--
Jérôme Marant <jerome.marant@free.fr>
<jerome@marant.org>
http://marant.org
Reply to: