Re: New python policy
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
[Steve Langasek]
> > Yes, this was also discussed in the BoF, with the same conclusion: because
> > providing python2.x-foo can only be done safely if the package depends on
> > the python2.x versions of all other modules it requires, making transitions
> > more brittle as a result, these virtual packages should really only be
> > provided in response to specific demand for them.
>
> For those of us who were not at the BoF and only getting sketchy
> information about it (e.g. Raphael's information is wrong, or at least
> horribly incomplete, I guess, and presentation slides are not a good
> summary of technical policy), when are we going to have a real proposal
> to comment on, or at least follow?
I don't think so since AFAIK nobody took notes. And since time was passing I
posted this summary to at least have something written.
> What happened to "Python 2.4 first, new infrastructure later"?
I don't know really...
Matthias has created python2.4 packages using pycentral. He would like to
use that as "official helper tool".
Now he's rewriting dh_python in that direction. More on pycentral vs
python-support in another mail.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
Reply to: