Hi Carl Friedrich,
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 12:03 +0200, Carl Friedrich Bolz wrote:
> Hi Holger,
>
> 2008/10/1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Author: hpk
> > Date: Wed Oct 1 11:39:27 2008
> > New Revision: 58518
> [snip]
> > +fedora usually has >=python 2.4 anyway so one can
> > +erase py/compat/*.py (except __init__.py)
> > +and put the following into a new file, e.g. py/compat/fedora.py
> > +
> > + import doctest
> > + import optparse
> > + import textwrap
> > + import subprocess
> > +
> > +and then change py/__init__.py to have py.compat like this:
> > +
> > +'compat.doctest' : ('./compat/fedora.py', 'doctest'),
> > +'compat.optparse' : ('./compat/fedora.py', 'optparse'),
> > +'compat.textwrap' : ('./compat/fedora.py', 'textwrap'),
> > +'compat.subprocess' : ('./compat/fedora.py', 'subprocess'),
>
> Wasn't the idea originally to not depend on the underlying stdlib for
> compat ever? Because then the py-lib user can rely on having always
> exactly the same version of these modules. I remember, because at one
> time I proposed to put a "try: import doctest except ImportError" into
> compat to get newer versions of these files if they are there.
yes, you are right. However, currently it prevents things
from getting packaged on fedora because they have a policy of
not having duplication of stdlib python modules and are using
python>=2.4 on their distribution anyway. This hasn't been a
problem with other distributions i think. thm (who does the
fedora packaging) will try to convince them to allow py/compat
and otherwise the above will be a fedora and 0.9.2 specific change.
In this case, i think it's pragmatic to not argue much.
For 1.0 we should look into getting things from 2.6 and
maybe we then have a stronger case for the fedora packaging
reviewers.
holger
_______________________________________________
py-dev mailing list
py-dev@codespeak.net
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/py-dev
