(debian-python readers, please see paragraph 2) On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 04:54:19PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: > It seems to me the this module is required only at build time, so it > should be safe to remove it from the binary package. (Please correct > me if I'm wrong.) This is true, but removing it from the binary package doesn't fix the code duplication, because it still builds with the private copy and not a public module. Should there ever be a serious problem with msgfmt.py, it's still got to be patched in multiple packages. Anyway, I'm increasingly thinking that those example scripts which are of production quality should be turned into binary packages installing as public modules, so that they are more easily recognised. Copying debian-python for a wider view; I'm happy to work on doing this, if it's worth it. If they're not production quality, then the packages using them shouldn't be and we have a different problem (at least with msgfmt.py, which I take it you have filed mass bugs for). > > >Copying the python-examples maintainer: your thoughts please? > > There are other packages that are actually using a copy of msgfmt.py > at runtime so the question if still valid. > > -- > Jakub Wilk -- Jonathan Wiltshire 1024D: 0xDB800B52 / 4216 F01F DCA9 21AC F3D3 A903 CA6B EA3E DB80 0B52 4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC 74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature