On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 08:40:02AM +0200, Martin Sj?gren wrote: > fre 2002-07-26 klockan 03.31 skrev Donovan Baarda: > > If people are using the "simple wrapper" approach to supporting the default > > Python, then switching to 2.2 would just consist of releasing empty wrapper > > packages with changed dependancies... pretty easy NMU stuff. > > > > If people are screaming for 2.2, then I'd say changing now and again to 2.3 > > in Dec would be minimal hassle. However, it depends on demand vs effort... > > > > If people really need 2.2, then it doesn't need to be the default anyway... > > just use the python2.2-<foo> packages... > > Except that a lot of packages only exist as python?<foo>. python-gtk and > pygame come to mind for example.
Then perhaps they need to be changed to pythonX.Y-<foo>? If the alternative of making python2.2 the default isn't going to happen as soon as people using those packages would like... It's up to the mantainers, but I would think that something as bleeding edge as as pygame and python-gtk would be logical candidates for python2.X-<foo> packages. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ABO: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info, including pgp key ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
