Le Dim 9 Avril 2006 19:56, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
> Le Dim 9 Avril 2006 14:18, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > > what's the policy about them ?
> > >
> > > should the packages be built for python 2.3 and 2.4 ? only for
> > > 2.3 ? only for 2.4 ?
> >
> > I guess it depends on the package. Currently the default seems
> > to be 2.3, but if it supports multiple versions, adding 2.4
> > probably won't hurt.
> >
> > > and currently bugs like #351145 are only normal bugs. is it okay
> > > to nmu in delayed/7 without warning ?
> >
> > See:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2006/04/msg00005.html
>
> okay, I've send delayed/7 NMUs for python packages in Dep-Wait of
> python2.{1,2}-dev. (actually I have still 5 to do, but that will be
> soon OK).
>
> I've not touched decompyle2.2, boot-floppies,
> libapache{,2}-mod-python, that hadn't any bug open related to
> python2.1 and python2.2 drop. I've (currently at least) not opened
> bugs to those 4 packages, feel free to do so.
ok, done.
I'd also like to alert debian-python about #351149 and #351150. Those
were fixed in a quite short period, but Lustin did not found any
sponsor. I don't know how hard he searched, but at least his packages
looked clean and well followed. He deserves better ;)
maybe someone from debian-python can step up as a sponsor ? I offered
him to do so, but I'm not *that* python interested, and someone more
involved with python would surely be better.
Cheers,
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgp3a5AQxNAaY.pgp
Description: PGP signature