Excerpts from Dimitri John Ledkov's message of 2013-12-27 07:18:05 -0800: > On 27 December 2013 15:00, Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org> wrote: > > On 12/17/2013 01:02 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > >> [...] > >> You'll want to have at least the following build dependencies: > >> > >> * debhelper (>= 8) > >> - * dh-python > >> * python-all (>= 2.6.6-3~) > >> * python-setuptools > >> * python3-all > >> * python3-setuptools > > > > Hi, > > > > Just reacting on the above change. It's my understanding that we do need > > to add dh-python explicitly if we want clean backports (eg: unchanged > > from Sid). Am I right? If that's the case, shouldn't we advise to write > > dh-python explicitly for until Jessie is released? > > > > Why should back-ports dictate how Jessie is developed? This is not the > same requirements as e.g. dpkg where last one must be able to process > all packages from the immediately next release. >
I don't think this is dictation, just pragmatic cooperation with a fairly popular service. > And dh-python is available from backports - stable-bpo 1.20131021-1~bpo70+1 > > I don't understand why are you insisting on blocking migrations to > dh-python. Is there some non-Debian requirement that you are omitting > / not-telling here? > I can't tell if you're being suspicious or leading. Either way, can we just trust each-other and use clear language? I don't see any ulterior motive there, just a desire to keep things simple. -- 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/1388160356-sup-8608@clint-HP
