Re: (again) Why default python is not 2.6 yet?
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:18:28PM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 15:49, Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:05:56AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> >> If there is a valid, technical reason, please let us know, but as of
> >> now I can't see any.
> >
> > Loads of RC bugfixes (partly on obsolete versions) waiting to enter testing
> > which would more blocked that it already is with the mips* buildd backlog.
>
> Those RC are still RC even in a month or 2, only that knowing them,
> they can be fixed.
You misinterpreted my sentence. I already have *7* RC bugs on OOo fixed in
sid. They wait for entering testing. Since weeks.
And I don't want 3.1.1 in squeeze. 3.2.0 is (indepently from
what I think) far better.
> >> So, let's just change the default to 2.6, kindly ask Lucas to do an
> >> archive-wide rebuild (I'm pretty sure he'll be happy to support us,
> >> but not certan, hey we still have to ask him ;) ), and deal with the
> >> fallback.
> >
> > For months. At which time we'll still have the completely obsolete OOo 3.1.1
> > (or whatever else example you find) in squeeze. No.
>
> That holds true any time we do the switch. So when should we change
> the default? the moment we freeze?
In a sane moment.
> You mentioned OOo, we have also libjpeg mess going on, and soon we'll
> have php5 probably.
Obviously those are sifferent, and php5 *is* the uptodate version, not
a 1 year old one.
> >> Keep waiting and waiting is pointless, and does only harm for the
> >> target to support a stable release (there are very few people actively
> >
> > That's true, though. But python's not alone in the world and if you did
> > it far earlier....
>
> I understand, when you touch "core/big" packages, there are always
> consequences; but I don't get what you're suggesting to actually
> switch: at freeze time, when there are no other transition on sight
> (i.e. never), release squeeze with 2.5 as default, else?
When should packages enter testing? Shortly before the freeze without
proper testing?
> It was not done before, that's a fact. It should be done now, and deal
> with the damage it generates (of course, with the help of RT, if they
> agree to start the transition).
>
> Regards,
> --
> Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
> My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
> Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: 8b2d7b4d1002170718s39d7a65cy22eb6c6ee571a6f8@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/8b2d7b4d1002170718s39d7a65cy22eb6c6ee571a6f8@mail.gmail.com
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: D03E3E70
`- Fingerprint: E12D EA46 7506 70CF A960 801D 0AA0 4571 D03E 3E70
Reply to: