[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RC severity for Python 2.6 related bugs



OoO Pendant le  journal télévisé du samedi 27  février 2010, vers 20:19,
Luca Falavigna <dktrkranz@debian.org> disait :

> after some discussions on #debian-python, I'd like to propose
> increasing severity of Python 2.6 related bugs [1] to serious.

Well, I disagree. Python 2.6  is not the default. Packages are currently
built with Python 2.5 and do not fail to build in a current pbuilder. We
already  had a bunch  of bug  reports about  packages not  building with
Python 2.6  as default a  few months ago  and it was  a mess to  setup a
pbuilder to build with Python 2.6 as default [1]. The solution is easier
now but not documented (to the best of my knowledge).

I  am also still  lost why  Python transition  communication is  done in
debian-release@ and not in debian-python@. debian-python@ contains posts
like "Why default  python is not 2.6 yet?" that  got not really answered
because the transition seems to be managed behind the scene.

It would be far  easier to let Python 2.6 be the  default, then file (or
upgrade) serious  bugs and solve them in  a week or two.  Most bug FTBFS
reports that I  received for my Python packages is  related to the build
process and does not hinder the  package from working with Python 2.6. I
think this is the case for most simple packages because the hard work is
done by python-support.

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=557925
-- 
BOFH excuse #447:
According to Microsoft, it's by design

Attachment: pgpZV2h1zEnfq.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: