Re: Proposed update to the python policy

2007-03-28 Thread Josselin Mouette
While the discussion is still ongoing about the "current" keyword, it seems that everyone agrees with the other changes which are only loosely related. Can we proceed with these, until we agree on how "current" should be replaced? -- .''`. : :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surren

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

2007-03-28 Thread Piotr Ożarowski
[Josselin Mouette, 28.03.2007] > While the discussion is still ongoing about the "current" keyword, it > seems that everyone agrees with the other changes which are only loosely > related. Can we proceed with these, until we agree on how "current" > should be replaced? IMHO, yes -- -=[ Piotr

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

2007-03-28 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 12:47:23PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > While the discussion is still ongoing about the "current" keyword, it > seems that everyone agrees with the other changes which are only loosely > related. Can we proceed with these, until we agree on how "current" > should be repl

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

2007-03-28 Thread Pierre Habouzit
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 04:22:07AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 12:47:23PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > While the discussion is still ongoing about the "current" keyword, it > > seems that everyone agrees with the other changes which are only loosely > > related. Can