Paul Tagliamonte <paul...@debian.org> wrote: >On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:16:22PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: >> Howdy all, >> >> Over at the ‘python-dev’ forum, PEP 453 is being discussed. This >affects >> Debian packaging of Python, and packages written for Python. >> >> See the discussion thread and take the opportunity to represent >Debian >> ><URL:https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-September/128723.html> >> while this major change to the behaviour of Python packaging is still >> being specified. >> >> Note that we don't need a dog-pile; someone with both knowledge and >time >> to discuss this will find that reasoned arguments work better there. >Who >> can do this? > >I butted in, since I was on python-dev anyway. > >http://hg.python.org/peps/rev/6c1b658bc16c > >is the changeset they made after I mentioned it was highly unlikely >that >it would be included. Basically, this means so long as >command-not-found >is installed, we're fine. > >I think this is a fine middleground and shouldn't be much if a problem. >Donald pung me after, and he's open to working with us.
Thanks for that. I think that resolves my concern about the mandatory nature of the PEP. I am still concerned about the security aspects of the design. It should be cryptographically verified and not installed as root. Scott K -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/698016e1-13c9-43f8-8d3b-ea44512c3...@email.android.com
