Le mercredi 13 juillet 2011 à 09:51 +0200, philippe makowski a écrit :
> 2011/7/13 Michael scherer <[email protected]>:
> >
> > I would be in favor of treating python2 and python 3 as 2 differents 
> > languages.
> > The rational is that :
> > - we cannot garantee to have support for both
> > -  we will likely have some module who would be updated only on
> > python 3 sooner or later
> > - we will need to do upgrade of package at different time, since both 
> > python2 and python3 are
> > released at different time.
> >
> > So rather than a complex scheme that will confuse packagers, just consider 
> > they
> > are separate, and use the almost same policy ( with s/python/python3/ )
> And how do you manage package that support both P2 and P3 ?
> (same source)

Either 2 rpms with the same source, or 1 rpm that generate 2 sub rpms.

I would rather use 2 separate rpms, as this seems to be easier.
-- 
Michael Scherer

Reply via email to