Jorge Vargas wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 7:50 PM, kochhar<[email protected]> wrote: >> I have a package repository which contains packages for pylons 0.9.6.1 After >> adding pylons 0.9.7 and it's dependent packages, my 0.9.6.1 projects stopped >> working. >> >> It seems bad practice for pylons to specify it's dependencies in the >> FooPackage>=x.y.z format; it's too easy to break something. Is there a way >> around this so I don't need to create separate package repositories for >> 0.9.6.1 >> and 0.9.7 > > I don't see this as bad format as a newer version is (in general a > better less buggy version)
Except when the new versions are not backwards compatible and break existing applications. Most libraries don't preserve backwards compatability indefinitely. It's fine practice to follow the latest and greatest in development but release version specify explicit dependencies to be stable in the face of changes. > that said they are two ways of fixing this. > 1- releasing 0.9.6.2 with a setup.py that excludes the new incompatible > versions > > Of course #1 is best so I suggest you confirm which versions are > broken and propose a patch. Yes, I'm working on a patch. Binary searching through package dependency versions isn't much fun. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
