Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Donovan Baarda
On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 02:51, Alexandre Fayolle wrote: > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 01:35:42PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > > Alexandre Fayolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > > OK, so keep them around until the version in question is dropped from > > the archive? > > This would be nice. Or un

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Domenico Andreoli
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 06:51:14PM +0200, Alexandre Fayolle wrote: ... > > > > > > -1 > > > ... > > My fault, I thought I was on python-dev (where -1 stands for 'I vote > against this', see http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0010.html) > this was interesting... -[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Alexandre Fayolle
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 01:35:42PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > Alexandre Fayolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:53:07AM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > >> But it is OK to drop 2.1/2.2 support for packages that nothing depends on? > > > > -1 > > > if -1: >pri

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Andreas Rottmann
Alexandre Fayolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:53:07AM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: >> But it is OK to drop 2.1/2.2 support for packages that nothing depends on? > > -1 > if -1: print "parsed as true" else: print "parsed as false" > > Developers are using such

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Alexandre Fayolle
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:53:07AM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > But it is OK to drop 2.1/2.2 support for packages that nothing depends on? -1 Developers are using such packages to check that their work will work on several python versions. For example, I recently had to work for a customer

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Andreas Rottmann
Jim Penny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 21:27:16 +0200 > Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for >> multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for >> the old Python version

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Ben Burton
> > - python2.1 is needed at least by zope and jython > > Would it still be needed in sarge if zope2.6.1 & jython were built > against python2.2? It's not a case of jython building against python 2.2 (in fact, it doesn't build-depend on any version of python at all). It's a case of jython provi

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Ron Johnson
On Tue, 2003-09-09 at 15:24, Matthias Klose wrote: > Andreas Rottmann writes: > > Hi! > > > > I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for > > multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for > > the old Python versions. IMHO, this should be documented somewh

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Jim Penny
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 21:27:16 +0200 Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for > multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for > the old Python versions. IMHO, this should be documented somewhere > (P

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Matthias Klose
Andreas Rottmann writes: > Hi! > > I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for > multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for > the old Python versions. IMHO, this should be documented somewhere > (Policy?). Is there any timeline how long Python 2.2 and

Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Andreas Rottmann
Hi! I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for the old Python versions. IMHO, this should be documented somewhere (Policy?). Is there any timeline how long Python 2.2 and 2.1 should stay in the archive? Rega