"Philipp Kern" <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 08/07/2010 05:09 PM, Cédric Delfosse wrote: >> Le vendredi 06 août 2010 à 23:31 -0400, Scott Kitterman a écrit : >> >>> If it's decided to release Squeeze with clamav, I think it would be good to >>> keep python-clamav too. The main use case is for admins who have written >>> their own scripts. >>> >>> I don't think it will be that difficult to keep up. Clamav upstream is >>> doing a >>> better job with maintaining ABI compatibility. If the current maintainer is >>> not interested in maintaining this in Squeeze, I'd be glad to adopt it into >>> DPMT where we are already maintaining python-pyclamd. >>> >>> Scott K >>> >>> P.S. I'm not subscribed to debian-release, so please cc me on any replies. >>> >> Hi Scott ! >> >> As upstream says: "You are now strongly encouraged to use pyClamd" [1] >> >> So I think the best thing to do would be to abandon this package. But if >> clamav enter Squeeze and you want to maintain python-pyclamav, feel free >> to adopt it. >> >> Regards, >> >> Cédric >> >> [1] http://xael.org/norman/python/pyclamav/ >> > >Scott, would this be an appropriate replacement? python-pyclamd is >currently in testing, but it has a very low version number and not much >updates, neither. (I.e. I don't know if it works as expected.) Would >you mind looking into it? > Last I checked it did work and it would be very surprising if it didn't continue to do so. At a high level (can you scan a file from Python with it) it does the same thing, but python-clamav does have additional functions not supported by python-pyclamd. It also doesn't require a running daemon to work. Now that clamav API/ABI appears to be stabalizing, I think the maintenance overhead of keeping python-clamav will not be much. Scott K P.S. Still not subscribed, so please CC me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
