Good evening,
Does anyone have opinions on this? Is there a need for a
python1.5-mxdatetime (based on the old mxdatetime) or a
python1.5-egenix-mxdatetime (based on the new egenix mxdatetime)?
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 07:33:59PM +0100, Joel Rosdahl wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > Package: python-mxdatetime
> > Version: N/A
> > Severity: important
>
> (Did you mean to send this to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Actually, I did send it. But it bounced with a weird message about
headers. Anyway, I prefer to talk to people before filing a
bug.
>
> > Please prepare a python1.5-mxdatetime that has the correct
> > dependencies for python1.5. This would be very useful to someone
> > who needs extra time to migrate from zope2.3 to zope2.4, for
> > example.
> >
> > The current package conflicts with python1.5. This should be a
> > simple matter of changing one dependency, and perhaps a conflicts
> > with python-mxdatetime and replaces python-mxdatetime.
>
> python-mx* has been replaced by python-egenix-mx*, and I have asked
> the FTP maintainers to remove python-mx* from testing and unstable.
> So the conflict between the new python packages and python-mxdatetime
> is expected. :-)
>
> I don't know much about Zope, but the indications I've received are
> that no Debian packages need python-egenix-mx* compiled for Python
> 1.5.
At least zope-popyda and psycopg depend on it (for python1.5).
I suspect that pgsql and possibly pygresql (deprecated but still there),
do as well. (as long as the zope 2.3 exists in testing, and possibly longer.)
You might check with [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] about their
intentions W.r.t python1.5. (You may certainly forward this to them.)
I would prefer to maintain the option for python-popy at least for now.
The zope maintainer believes that he can transition people from
zope2.3.x to zope2.4.x painlessly. I have been through at least
three upgrades, and can testify that it usually is quite pain filled.
Objects are often pickled in ZODB in a way that is not completely
compatible with the upgraded version. At very least, it requires
massive testing.
I have no strong opinion on the -mxdatetime versus egenix-mxdatetime for
1.5. To be conservative, 1.5 ought to be about making no big changes
at this time, so I guess I would mildly prefer -mxdatetime, on the
principle of the "devil you know".
>
> (But you maybe mean that Debian should have a python1.5-mxdatetime so
> that people who have installed Zope manually don't need to also
> install mxdatetime manually?)
people who have installed manually zope and these packages
are not really important; the packages in question all are heavily
automaked and have proven moderately difficult for limited skill
people to install. But, as zope source-installs in a quite FHS
unfriendly way, it would be quite difficult for a .deb to figure
out where to install them, anyway, so they must have managed
somehow. No, what I am worried about is people who do an upgrade
and suddenly have massive breakage.
I would like to preserve at the the option of backing down to zope2.3.
And I think that there remain a handful of other important programs that
still require 1.5.
>
> Regards,
> Joel
Thanks for your time and attention.
Jim
>
>
> --
> Joel Rosdahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (PGP and GPG keys available)
>
--- End Message ---
--
Joel Rosdahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (PGP and GPG keys available)
