Re: [kobold@debian.org: The future of Zope{2, 3} and Plone in Debian and Ubuntu]

[Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>]

On 20.09.2009 16:45, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> if i got it right then packaging the dependencies as seperate packages
> isn't an option for zope2.12, we'll have to include them within the
> zope2.10 source tarball. the reason for that is, that zope2.12 requires
> particular versions of the dependencies, and doesn't build even if minor
> versions aren't correct.

this is the usual answer from an upstream with more than 50 dependencies. From 
my experience this based on the fact that upstream only wants to test and 
certify one configuration, and doesn't take responsibility for anything else. On 
the other hand a distribution tries to minimize the duplicate code in its 
distribution, and applies patches to packages to make these work. Look at 
OpenOffice, eclipse, etc. zope is not different. It's up to you as a packager to 
decide what you can maintain, and where you do want to duplicate sources.

> > I do not want to wait with the removal of python2.4 from unstable
> > for too long, I think a short time without zope2.x in unstable is
> > ok, while having three python2.x versions is too much. But it looks
> > like zope2.12 based on python2.5 or python2.6 is doable for squeeze.
>
> i didn't know that packaging zope2.12 is that timeconsuming at the time
> that i proposed to wait with removing python2.4 from unstable. so no
> objections against removal of pyhton2.4/zope2.10/zope2.11 from my side
> any longer.

ok, I'll file a request for removal next week; zope2.x was the last package 
absolutely needing python2.4.

  Matthias