Le Dim 9 Avril 2006 19:56, Pierre Habouzit a écrit : > Le Dim 9 Avril 2006 14:18, Kurt Roeckx a écrit : > > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > what's the policy about them ? > > > > > > should the packages be built for python 2.3 and 2.4 ? only for > > > 2.3 ? only for 2.4 ? > > > > I guess it depends on the package. Currently the default seems > > to be 2.3, but if it supports multiple versions, adding 2.4 > > probably won't hurt. > > > > > and currently bugs like #351145 are only normal bugs. is it okay > > > to nmu in delayed/7 without warning ? > > > > See: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2006/04/msg00005.html > > okay, I've send delayed/7 NMUs for python packages in Dep-Wait of > python2.{1,2}-dev. (actually I have still 5 to do, but that will be > soon OK). > > I've not touched decompyle2.2, boot-floppies, > libapache{,2}-mod-python, that hadn't any bug open related to > python2.1 and python2.2 drop. I've (currently at least) not opened > bugs to those 4 packages, feel free to do so.
ok, done. I'd also like to alert debian-python about #351149 and #351150. Those were fixed in a quite short period, but Lustin did not found any sponsor. I don't know how hard he searched, but at least his packages looked clean and well followed. He deserves better ;) maybe someone from debian-python can step up as a sponsor ? I offered him to do so, but I'm not *that* python interested, and someone more involved with python would surely be better. Cheers, -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O [EMAIL PROTECTED] OOO http://www.madism.org
pgpgEC2GfexwV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
