Il 27/04/2010 11.17, Toni Mueller ha scritto: > I am not sure that this was a good choice, although I feel the pain of > maintaining a Python 2.4 stack in Squeeze, because: > > * Plone, and thus Zope is still a major Python application, and I > heavily doubt that Plone 4.0 will see the light in time to make it > into Squeeze (it's currently in alpha state, afaik). > > * The upgrade from Plone 3 to Plone 4 requires significant work, which > many users will probably not even be able to handle shortly, so > their options will be to continue to run Lenny, compile from source > entirely, along with appropriate testing and deployment efforts, or > to switch platforms. > > * I therefore think that Plone 3 is here to stay for at least one or > two more years, because of the migration effort. > > * Plone 3 absolutely requires Zope 2.10. When dealing with python2.4 removal, we asked Fabio about state of the art of Zope 2.14 and Plone 4. He replied he hadn't way to look at them at that time, and he would have looked upgrading the whole stack in April/May. CCing him, to see if things evolved. > If Python2.4 will stay out of Squeeze, I think removal bugs should be > filed against all packages that are required for Plone3 and not > elsewhere, including Zope 2.10 and friends to avoid trying to eg. > install a package only to see an error message because depenencies > can't be met. Right? Wrong? When removing python2.4 packages, we told ftpteam to leave rdependencies alone for the time being, as they have to be fixed, and clearing NEW again wouldn't have been that efficient. If those packages are beyond any repair, maybe filing RM bugs against them is the way to go. Fabio, thoughts? Regards, -- .''`. : :' : Luca Falavigna <dktrkranz@debian.org> `. `' `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature