Re: [kob...@debian.org: The future of Zope{2, 3} and Plone in Debian and Ubuntu]
Hello, * 2009-07-02 14:05, Jonas Meurer wrote: why not wait for zope2.12 with python2.5/2.6 support, upload that one to debian/unstable and afterwards file a request for removal for zope2.10/zope2.11/python2.4? I believe that a zope2.12 release candidate will be published within the next month, given that a beta2 has already been published on 27. of may. That way we would have a zope2 release available in debian/unstable all the time would. Zope2.12 is a different source/binary package: why can't we just drop it now, and when the 2.12 release will be out upload it to testing/unstable? I don't see the point of keeping zope2.10 around just because zope2.12 is not ready: I really want to avoid releasing a new stable release of Debian or Ubuntu with zope2.10. -- Fabio Tranchitella http://www.kobold.it Free Software Developer and Consultant http://www.tranchitella.it _ 1024D/7F961564, fpr 5465 6E69 E559 6466 BF3D 9F01 2BF8 EE2B 7F96 1564 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
what's keeping python2.6? why is Josselin acting like a deaf man when his packages contain critical bugs?
Hi team python, I am quite curious to hear what is keeping python2.6 from entering debian sid? It's a rock solid release, which has seen many bugfixes, and is the fastest python version ever. The package in experimental has had only 2 bugreports, both are fixed. Please, instead of putting so much effort in turbogears2 and zope and whatever, wouldn't it be better to finally upgrade to the latest python which was released in OCTOBER 2008? Also, a more personal note to that notorious person called Josselin: why don't you answer any emails regarding your debian packages? Why don't you even respond when I ask for a simple upgrade of the python-pymssql package, even after filing a critical bug report about the grave bugs that make the package unusable? Pymssql 1.0.2 was released over 2 months ago. Upgrading the debian package takes about 5 minutes of your time. Even if you don't have time to do that, a small reply to an email or to a bug report would be more than welcome. Best regards, Jan Geboers
Re: what's keeping python2.6? why is Josselin acting like a deaf man when his packages contain critical bugs?
Hello Jan, I would like to reply politely: sorry if I will not be able to (or the resulting words don't look like), the intention is this :) On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 11:00, Jan Geboershiding@gmail.com wrote: Hi team python, I am quite curious to hear what is keeping python2.6 from entering debian sid? I think several people wonder this. From a technical point of view, there is some work to do on the modules to make them compatible with 2.6 new features (for example: dist-package instead of site-package, /usr/local instead of /usr etc). This transition is currently running, but it's not yet completed; but I also think that an upload without adding to support version would work. It's a rock solid release, which has seen many bugfixes, and is the fastest python version ever. The package in experimental has had only 2 bugreports, both are fixed. I'm not sure if this ml is the right place to ask: the description on [1] reports Discussion of issues related to Python on Debian systems with a stress on packaging standards. Therefore relevant for maintainers of Python related packages. so it may or may not be on topic :) [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-python/ But in any case, you should ask the package maintainer that, as you can see on [2], is maintained outside a team (that we can ideally suppose be represented by people actively working on python stuff) so its his decision you're looking for and we (honestly) don't know. [2] http://packages.qa.debian.org/p/python2.6.html Please, instead of putting so much effort in turbogears2 and zope and whatever, wouldn't it be better to finally upgrade to the latest python which was released in OCTOBER 2008? Never write something like this: we are all volunteers, and we are free to work on whatever we like in our spare time. If you want something done, then work on it: did you contributed to py2.6 packaging, for example? Please also note that debian is also used in companies, and they might need zope package working for money to come to their bank accounts, so don't speculate. Also, a more personal note to that notorious person called Josselin: why don't you answer any emails regarding your debian packages? Why don't you even respond when I ask for a simple upgrade of the python-pymssql package, even after filing a critical bug report about the grave bugs that make the package unusable? Pymssql 1.0.2 was released over 2 months ago. Upgrading the debian package takes about 5 minutes of your time. Even if you don't have time to do that, a small reply to an email or to a bug report would be more than welcome. This is a personal attack (against a guy I believe to be very active, technically skilled, even if something a little bit rough ;) ) and I don't like it at all. If you have complains against him not fixing a RC bug on that package, reply to the bug itself, so that a public statement of your pressure on the bug is made. Additionally, you can also help the maintainer, preparing a NMU or a series of patches to fix what you believe to be wrong, so that you can alleviate him from some work. That said, I really hope you now provide an updated package to Joss for him to check and possibly upload. Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: The future of Zope{2,3} and Plone in Debian and Ubuntu
Hey,
On 05/07/2009 Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
* 2009-07-02 14:04, Jonas Meurer wrote:
I do think that the debian zope managment tools (dzhandle,
zope-debhelper) do a great job, and I really would be sad to see them
go.
I already did some housekeeping maintenance work for zope2.{10,11} and
zope-common in the past, and I intend to continue that work in the
future.
zope-common is really usable on for Zope2: nobody uses instances for the
zope3 stack anymore. Maybe we should make a new upload to zope-common do
remove support for the zope3 stack (which will be removed from unstable
very soon, as a monolithic package).
yes, if dzhandle is not useful for zope3 anymore, then zope3 support
should be removed from it. i didn't use zope3 yet, so i don't know
anything about that.
With that roadmap we at least would have one zope2 version in
debian/unstable all the time.
It is possible, are you going to commit yourself to maintain it? That would
be great: I'm not a zope2 consumer anymore, so it is quite pointless for me
to maintain it.
in fact i already prepared and uploaded zope2.11 and also did the last
uploads of zope2.10 and zope-common. and i intend to keep on doing the
work. so yes, i somehow do feel responsible for zope2 in debian :-)
still i would be really glad to have you as backup maintainer,
especially as you have much more zope/python skills than I do.
greetings,
jonas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: The future of Zope{2,3} and Plone in Debian and Ubuntu
Hello, * 2009-07-05 16:33, Jonas Meurer wrote: in fact i already prepared and uploaded zope2.11 and also did the last uploads of zope2.10 and zope-common. and i intend to keep on doing the work. so yes, i somehow do feel responsible for zope2 in debian :-) still i would be really glad to have you as backup maintainer, especially as you have much more zope/python skills than I do. Feel free to keep me in the uploaders field: I'm willing to help as a co-maintainer, but I don't have time to work as the only maintainer of zope2.X. I think we should remove zope2.10 from Debian now, though. -- Fabio Tranchitella http://www.kobold.it Free Software Developer and Consultant http://www.tranchitella.it _ 1024D/7F961564, fpr 5465 6E69 E559 6466 BF3D 9F01 2BF8 EE2B 7F96 1564 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: what's keeping python2.6? why is Josselin acting like a deaf man when his packages contain critical bugs?
Hi Sandro, thanks for replying. I dont have much time right now to prepare a large piece on this, but I wanted to say that I have tried to contact Josselin, both by email and debian bug report, but no success so far. I also tried to get in touch with Matthias Klose with regard to the state of the python 2.6 package, but no reply came to that either. Even a short statement about the progress would be more than welcome, or maybe a call for assistance on the specific parts of work that can be done? But if both the python maintainer and the maintainer of the individual package can't be bothered to reply to e-mails or read their bug report that is marked critical, what more can be done? It's hard to help if you have no clue about where the problem or high workload is situated. Taking into account Josselin's charming personality I'm quite sure that he wouldn't even accept an updated version of said package that I would provide to him. Personal attacks are not my intention, I hope my point of view isn't interpreted as such, I just care about Debian as a whole, and the state of python in Debian in particular. Best regards, Jan Geboers On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 14:50, Sandro Tosi mo...@debian.org wrote: Hello Jan, I would like to reply politely: sorry if I will not be able to (or the resulting words don't look like), the intention is this :) On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 11:00, Jan Geboershiding@gmail.com wrote: Hi team python, I am quite curious to hear what is keeping python2.6 from entering debian sid? I think several people wonder this. From a technical point of view, there is some work to do on the modules to make them compatible with 2.6 new features (for example: dist-package instead of site-package, /usr/local instead of /usr etc). This transition is currently running, but it's not yet completed; but I also think that an upload without adding to support version would work. It's a rock solid release, which has seen many bugfixes, and is the fastest python version ever. The package in experimental has had only 2 bugreports, both are fixed. I'm not sure if this ml is the right place to ask: the description on [1] reports Discussion of issues related to Python on Debian systems with a stress on packaging standards. Therefore relevant for maintainers of Python related packages. so it may or may not be on topic :) [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-python/ But in any case, you should ask the package maintainer that, as you can see on [2], is maintained outside a team (that we can ideally suppose be represented by people actively working on python stuff) so its his decision you're looking for and we (honestly) don't know. [2] http://packages.qa.debian.org/p/python2.6.html Please, instead of putting so much effort in turbogears2 and zope and whatever, wouldn't it be better to finally upgrade to the latest python which was released in OCTOBER 2008? Never write something like this: we are all volunteers, and we are free to work on whatever we like in our spare time. If you want something done, then work on it: did you contributed to py2.6 packaging, for example? Please also note that debian is also used in companies, and they might need zope package working for money to come to their bank accounts, so don't speculate. Also, a more personal note to that notorious person called Josselin: why don't you answer any emails regarding your debian packages? Why don't you even respond when I ask for a simple upgrade of the python-pymssql package, even after filing a critical bug report about the grave bugs that make the package unusable? Pymssql 1.0.2 was released over 2 months ago. Upgrading the debian package takes about 5 minutes of your time. Even if you don't have time to do that, a small reply to an email or to a bug report would be more than welcome. This is a personal attack (against a guy I believe to be very active, technically skilled, even if something a little bit rough ;) ) and I don't like it at all. If you have complains against him not fixing a RC bug on that package, reply to the bug itself, so that a public statement of your pressure on the bug is made. Additionally, you can also help the maintainer, preparing a NMU or a series of patches to fix what you believe to be wrong, so that you can alleviate him from some work. That said, I really hope you now provide an updated package to Joss for him to check and possibly upload. Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
Re: what's keeping python2.6? why is Josselin acting like a deaf man when his packages contain critical bugs?
Jan Geboers hiding@gmail.com writes: Personal attacks are not my intention, I hope my point of view isn't interpreted as such, If that is truly what you want, then you must realise that paragraphs like this: Taking into account Josselin's charming personality I'm quite sure that he wouldn't even accept an updated version of said package that I would provide to him. work directly against that. A personal attack is *exactly* what that paragraph is; please omit such sentiments from future messages if they are not your intention. -- \“None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love | `\ not freedom, but license.” —John Milton | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: The future of Zope{2,3} and Plone in Debian and Ubuntu
On 05/07/2009 Fabio Tranchitella wrote: * 2009-07-05 16:33, Jonas Meurer wrote: in fact i already prepared and uploaded zope2.11 and also did the last uploads of zope2.10 and zope-common. and i intend to keep on doing the work. so yes, i somehow do feel responsible for zope2 in debian :-) still i would be really glad to have you as backup maintainer, especially as you have much more zope/python skills than I do. Feel free to keep me in the uploaders field: I'm willing to help as a co-maintainer, but I don't have time to work as the only maintainer of zope2.X. I think we should remove zope2.10 from Debian now, though. no problem, but please at least lets keep zope2.11 for some more time. greetings, jonas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
