[Matthias Klose, 2018-09-25]
> > how about generating dependencies on python2.7 and moving
> > pycompile/pyclean there as well (this also solves pre-dependency issue)
> >
> >> - Not having a python package in bullseye (buster+1), but a
> >>python2 package doesn't point to any "default" anymor
sorry, I never replied to that email.
On 10.06.2018 13:59, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Matthias Klose, 2018-06-08]
>> from my point of view this doesn't address:
>>
>> - being able to de-install the python command for buster, if
>>people don't use it. Most dependencies are auto-generated, so
>
[Matthias Klose, 2018-06-08]
> from my point of view this doesn't address:
>
> - being able to de-install the python command for buster, if
>people don't use it. Most dependencies are auto-generated, so
>these could be replaced by dependencies on python2. I would
>assume that the maj
On 19.05.2018 07:24, Stuart Prescott wrote:
Matthias Klose wrote:
The distro should get
out of the way of using the python symlink, and giving users the freedom /
choice what to do about the link.
I think I understand your rationale to stop shipping /usr/bin/python and
once the unversioned sym
On May 22, 2018 7:24:12 PM UTC, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>On 05/20/2018 11:49 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 05/17/2018 08:53 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
>>>
>>> The most important change from my point of view is
>>>
>>> -* It is sug
On 05/20/2018 11:49 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 05/17/2018 08:53 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
>>
>> The most important change from my point of view is
>>
>> -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages follow the
>> -
On 05/17/2018 08:53 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
>
> The most important change from my point of view is
>
> -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages follow the
> - ``python2``/``python3`` convention, even in code th
On 05/21/2018 01:38 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> You probably didn't notice that this is already happening (mentioned in the
> thread).
Great!
> There are other parts of the proposal that we are less sanguine about that
> you conveniently removed. It is probably a better idea to get your facts
On May 20, 2018 9:49:27 PM UTC, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>On 05/17/2018 08:53 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
>>
>> The most important change from my point of view is
>>
>> -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages foll
On 05/17/2018 08:53 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
>
> The most important change from my point of view is
>
> -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages follow the
> - ``python2``/``python3`` convention, even in code th
Matthias Klose wrote:
> The distro should get
> out of the way of using the python symlink, and giving users the freedom /
> choice what to do about the link.
I think I understand your rationale to stop shipping /usr/bin/python and
once the unversioned symlink disappears from use in Debian then a
On Friday, May 18, 2018 07:29:19 PM Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 18.05.2018 18:14, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Friday, May 18, 2018 11:31:37 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
> >> On 18.05.2018 05:19, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> >>> [Matthias Klose, 2018-05-17]
> >>>
> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April
On 18.05.2018 19:24, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>> A bit disappointed about this style of communication, Matthias
>
> same here (you want us to do something without explaining reasons)
> EOT for me.
well, I thought I explained in the first message. The distro should get out of
the way of using the p
On 18.05.2018 18:14, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Friday, May 18, 2018 11:31:37 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 18.05.2018 05:19, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>>> [Matthias Klose, 2018-05-17]
>>>
PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
The most important change from my
> A bit disappointed about this style of communication, Matthias
same here (you want us to do something without explaining reasons)
EOT for me.
--
GPG: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645
On 18.05.2018 19:02, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>> who said, that we should rename packages? The only packages being dropped are
>> the python defaults packages.
>>>
>>> I refuse to do that work!
>>
>> There is no work in renaming the packages. It's about the dependency
>> generation
>> and the sheban
> who said, that we should rename packages? The only packages being dropped are
> the python defaults packages.
> >
> > I refuse to do that work!
>
> There is no work in renaming the packages. It's about the dependency
> generation
> and the shebang.
the work in dh-python is not trivial. The wo
On Friday, May 18, 2018 11:31:37 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 18.05.2018 05:19, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> > [Matthias Klose, 2018-05-17]
> >
> >> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
> >>
> >> The most important change from my point of view is
> >>
> >> -* It is suggest
On 18.05.2018 05:19, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Matthias Klose, 2018-05-17]
>> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
>>
>> The most important change from my point of view is
>>
>> -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages follow the
>> - ``python2``/``pyth
[Matthias Klose, 2018-05-17]
> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
>
> The most important change from my point of view is
>
> -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages follow the
> - ``python2``/``python3`` convention, even in code that is not intende
PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3].
The most important change from my point of view is
-* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages follow the
- ``python2``/``python3`` convention, even in code that is not intended to
+* It is strongly encouraged that di
21 matches
Mail list logo
