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

Re: About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny

Philipp Kern wrote:
> I'm curious why python-pyme is not sufficient.

It's simply a MISTAKE that has been done by the last maintainer of yum,
python-pyme is NOT the correct python package, python-gpgme is the right
one. python-pyme is fully in python, while python-gpgme is written in C.
Maybe it would be possible to have yum working with python-pyme (I
didn't dive into it, and have no intention to do so), but I think it's
really not worth so much trouble having a special crafted yum that will
be different from upstream, when the solution is to use the correct package.

> Anyway: there won't be
> new packages introduced into Lenny.  I'm uncomfortable targetting this
> at this point. IMHO it's at you now to provide a set of patches that
> you think need to be applied to the packages in question to make yum
> work again.

How can I provide a set of patches when the problem is that 2 python
modules are needed? We can't ship these 2 python modules in yum, this
goes against the policy, and against any reasonable thinking.

> Attach them to the bug report and ping us again.  And
> remember: no new packages.
> Thanks in advance,
> Philipp Kern

No new package == no working yum.

Note that I perfectly understand the release cycle of Lenny, how it
works, and why it's like that. No new package, end of the story. But I
think, this time, it would be harmful to not make an exception, simply
because of an established principle. Again, this is a grave regression.

So what do you suggest now? Leave a BROKEN package in the distribution,
simply because it's the rule? IMHO it would even be better to REMOVE yum
from Lenny than leaving it the way it is right now: it's NOT working,
and it will never will unless we provide the dependencies. So better
remove it, and provide it in Lenny backports. This is my suggestion if
there is really no other choice (I still feel like we should make an
exception here...).

What I still don't get, is that I'm pretty sure that I have sent an RC
bug against the package a long time ago, and I don't understand why it
was not in the BTS. I feel so bad that I didn't check for it enough...

Thomas Goirand

Reply to: