On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 07:22:36AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > python1.5's still useful to users, isn't it, especially ones with
> > important python programs
> that was the precondition for the removal. Currently there are xtalk
> and python-pam. I do not count pydb, because a debugger for the old
> version alone doesn't make sense.
I mean for people who haven't managed to port their *own* (unpackaged) apps
to python 2.x.
Considering this list just went through convincing me that this *wasn't*
a trivial matter, I hope you're not going to go changing your minds on me
now.
Also, if python1.5's dropped from woody+1, then people who want it are
at least able to get it from woody; if it's dropped from woody they
can't get it from potato.
> > they don't want to port to 2.1 just yet?
> where "yet" is greater than about a year ..., and compared to python2
> much longer.
We didn't port to 2.1 until just now. Don't see why we should expect
everyone else to have done so already.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
"Security here. Yes, maam. Yes. Groucho glasses. Yes, we're on it.
C'mon, guys. Somebody gave an aardvark a nose-cut: somebody who
can't deal with deconstructionist humor. Code Blue."
-- Mike Hoye,
see http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/armadillos.txt
Attachment:
pgpF6EbpYoUQj.pgp
Description: PGP signature