On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:46:48 -0500 Kumar Appaiah wrote:
But it would be nice to see Python 2.7 in Debian soon. :-)
It's available in experimental (not the latest beta, though). But
indeed it would be great to have the 2.6-2.7 transition started a
little earlier than the 2.5-2.6 one :-)
[Omer Zak, 2010-04-20]
My take of the situation:
Yes, please backport PEP 3147 to at least Python 2.7.
The rationale: we'll need to support both Python 2.x and Python 3.x for
several years, and it will be nice if the same library package can be
made to support both 2.x and 3.x.
you cannot
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 10:48 -0300, Luciano Bello wrote:
El Jue 08 Abr 2010, Luciano Bello escribió:
El Mié 07 Abr 2010, C.J. Adams-Collier escribió:
It is already being worked on. The package is being hosted on alioth and
seems to build for me. I don't know what is keeping it from being
* C.J. Adams-Collier c...@colliertech.org, 2010-04-20, 09:02:
It is already being worked on. The package is being hosted on
alioth and seems to build for me. I don't know what is keeping it
from being rfs'd. Maybe robin knows?
are you talking about Robin Munn? I'm not sure if he can sponsor
On Apr 20, 2010, at 10:14 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
[Omer Zak, 2010-04-20]
My take of the situation:
Yes, please backport PEP 3147 to at least Python 2.7.
The rationale: we'll need to support both Python 2.x and Python 3.x for
several years, and it will be nice if the same library package
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 15:39 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Apr 20, 2010, at 06:50 AM, Omer Zak wrote:
My take of the situation:
Yes, please backport PEP 3147 to at least Python 2.7.
The rationale: we'll need to support both Python 2.x and Python 3.x for
several years, and it will be nice if
On Monday, April 19, 2010 05:53:05 pm Barry Warsaw wrote:
Apologies for the cross-post, but I want to make sure that everyone who
cares about Python on both Debian and Ubuntu gets a chance to weigh in.
On Friday, Guido approved and I landed the implementation of PEP 3147 on
the py3k trunk
[Barry Warsaw, 2010-04-20]
On Apr 20, 2010, at 10:14 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
[Omer Zak, 2010-04-20]
My take of the situation:
Yes, please backport PEP 3147 to at least Python 2.7.
The rationale: we'll need to support both Python 2.x and Python 3.x for
several years, and it will be
[Barry Warsaw, 2010-04-20]
If 10.10 includes
only Python 2.7, then sure, we'll only back port to that version.
why do you want to backport it to 2.X for a single python2.x package?
--
Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc
On 04/01/2010 10:27 AM, Toni Mueller wrote:
I'm sorry to say that I forgot to upload my semi-broken attempts - just
fixed it - maybe they still provide a useful starting point:
http://people.debian.org/~toni/python2.6/
Please send feedback my way!
I think Fabio (kob...@d.o) also wanted
* Umang Varma umang...@gmail.com, 2010-04-18, 08:30:
My general impression is that it's yet another (very) bad piece of
documentation. Feel free to ignore my opinion however, as I'm
already prejudiced. :P
It's hard to ignore your opinion (or for that matter, that of any DD
here). When you say
On 21/04/10 05:01, Jakub Wilk wrote:
Who is your target audience? If you want this document to be read by
packaging newbies, then this document is terribly incomplete.
That, I believe, would be because of my very limited knowledge in the
field. Although I may not have explicitly said this
* 2010-04-21 01:17, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
I think Fabio (kob...@d.o) also wanted to / is working on a backport,
might make sense to co-maintain that with him. CCed him :)
I'm definitely interested in co-maintaining the backport (and using my own
backport in production already). I'll have a look
13 matches
Mail list logo
