On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 17:10, Torsten Marek wrote: [...] > ElementTidy contains a C extension module.
I don't know what the current upstream favored approach with extension modules is. I suggest (a bit out of the blue, in no way yet endorsed by anyone) have two source packages; pythonX.Y-foo (where X.Y is really "X.Y", not "2.3") that generates the multiple binary packages python2.2-foo, python2.3-foo, python2.4-foo, etc. It should build depend on each corresponding python2.2-dev, python2.3-dev, python2.4-dev etc. python-foo, which generates the single dummy binary package python-foo with the appropriate dependencies to tie it to the current default python. This way, when python goes from 2.3 to 2.4, you only need to update the python-foo source package, and the pythonX.Y-foo source package and all it's binaries doesn't need to be updated. Note that this is kind of what Python itself does; it has a python-defaults source package that builds the python package, and the python2.3 source package that builds the python2.3 binaries. I have a feeling that the current python maintainers are pushing towards only supporting a single version of Python, so they will hate this suggestion. However, I think supporting multiple versions is very desirable, and think this is probably the best way to handle it for extension modules. -- Donovan Baarda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
