Le lundi 10 octobre 2005 à 17:01 +0100, Donovan Baarda a écrit : > In 2.2.2, I would remove the "only" from "only supports python versions > different from the currrent default one"... You can use this for > packages that support the current default one as well as other versions. The next section deals about such a scheme. > In 2.2.3, part 1. I would recommend (mandate?) that the python-foo dummy > wrapper package should have it's own tiny source package, seperate from > the pythonX.Y-foo source package. This way, only the small python-foo > wrapper package needs to be updated and re-built when the default python > changes. I think the ftp-masters and/or release would object to having so many more source packages to deal with; I've heard it would cause problems when we went up with this kind of idea for GNOME metapackages. > For 2.2.3 part 2, I don't know what to do... there has been no progress > in making this work for a long time, and I don't know if there ever will > be. It's probably still worth documenting as a wish list, but I can't > help but think it's overly complicated somehow. I agree, maybe we should remove documentation about things not working. > Another alternative for 2.2.3 part 2 is the practice adopted by some > pure-python packages of putting modules in /usr/lib/site-python, which > can be found on the default sys.path of all versions of python. The > ugliness of this is the pyc's get recompiled for different versions of > python, and will be re-written if the user has write access there. For > all it's drawbacks, it is a much lighter alternative to the mass of > symlinks approach... I wouldn't recommend this method, because of that possible .pyc autogeneration and the stale files it leaves in the filesystem. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\ : :' : josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org `. `' joss@debian.org `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part