On Jan 20, 2011, at 08:55 PM, Michael Fladischer wrote:
>Barry Warsaw, 2011-01-20 20:26:
>> On Jan 20, 2011, at 07:22 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>>> Would it make sense to rename upstream module to importlib3 (to recall
>>> the fact it's a backport from py3k) and so it would importable also in
>>> 2.7
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jakub Wilk, 2011-01-19 23:49:
>>> Is there a better way to do this with python-support?
>
> I don't think so.
Thanks, I'll stick with manually defined Depends.
Regards,
- --
Michael Fladischer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (G
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barry Warsaw, 2011-01-20 20:26:
> On Jan 20, 2011, at 07:22 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>> Would it make sense to rename upstream module to importlib3 (to recall
>> the fact it's a backport from py3k) and so it would importable also in
>> 2.7 along with the
On Jan 20, 2011, at 07:22 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>Attention: stupid question coming.
Not at all!
>Would it make sense to rename upstream module to importlib3 (to recall
>the fact it's a backport from py3k) and so it would importable also in
>2.7 along with the stdlib 'importlib' module?
I think
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 17:58, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jan 20, 2011, at 05:20 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
>
>>This is not relevant to the question about the toolchain that you were
>>asking, but I’d like to point out that importlib in 2.7 is only a subset
>>of the version in 3.1 (precisely, importlib.
* Éric Araujo , 2011-01-20, 17:20:
I’d like to point out that importlib in 2.7 is only a subset
of the version in 3.1 (precisely, importlib.import_module only), so
packaging a full backport of importlib makes sense for 2.7 too.
python-import is not a full backport of 3.X's importlib. In fact,
On Jan 20, 2011, at 05:20 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
>This is not relevant to the question about the toolchain that you were
>asking, but I’d like to point out that importlib in 2.7 is only a subset
>of the version in 3.1 (precisely, importlib.import_module only), so
>packaging a full backport of impo
> Following up #606711, I'd like to ask what's the best way to tailor
> python dependencies for a package when it's content is a backport of a
> future Debian default python (e.g. 2.7) feature?
>
> In the case of importlib, it's inclusion in upstream python started with
> 2.7 but I'd like to provi
* Sandro Tosi , 2011-01-19, 23:04:
In the case of importlib, it's inclusion in upstream python started
with 2.7 but I'd like to provide the backport for at least 2.6.
python-support translates "XS-Python-Version: 2.5,2.6" into "python
(<< 2.7)" for ${python:Depends}, so once 2.7 becomes the de
resending to d-python, probably there's more audience here then on DPMT ml
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 20:48, Michael Fladischer wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi team,
>
> Following up #606711, I'd like to ask what's the best way to tailor
> python dependencies for a pa
10 matches
Mail list logo
