On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 13:01 -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 09:26:02AM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 12:14:35PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the update, the patch, and the ping. > > > > > > Python-parted has not been actively worked on within Progeny for quite > > > some time -- I think this is mainly due to our Debian "port" of Anaconda > > > using Red Hat's version of Python-parted instead. > > > > > > Nevertheless, I'm having a look at your patch right now. > > > > Should Debian replace the Progeny python-parted with the Red Hat one, then? > > I've heard Jeff Licquia gripe a lot about Red Hat's, so I'm not sure > that's the best choice. He's the person to ask, though, so I'm CCing > him.
It's my understanding that the parted maintainer blessed the Red Hat bindings, and that most people doing Python things with parted are using the Red Hat API. Thus, I would recommend that we use Red Hat's bindings in the interest of compatibility. If you're interested, I have already packaged the Red Hat bindings for my Anaconda for Debian work. They should be available at any Componentized Linux mirror as "python-parted-rh". I was planning to upload them at some point once I had thought about a migration strategy for the very few projects using our bindings, but if you have a deeper abiding interest in them beyond mine (which is, basically, "keep Anaconda working"), then feel free to take it over. Alternatively, I can upload them if they're something you need, but don't feel inclined to maintain long-term. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
