On Friday, May 22, 2015 12:34:02 AM Brian May wrote: > On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 07:14 Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> wrote: > > I was considering the idea of porting things from ipaddr to ipaddress for > > python2, but there's a lot more of that then there is for ipaddress (which > > is > > up to only two packages we know about). > > As it is a goal to have everything Python3 compliant, and as Jessie no > longer has python3-ipaddr (it was in wheezy), everything is going to have > to support ipaddress for python3 anyway. > > I don't see why we don't drop python-ipaddr, and replace it with > python-ipaddress.
I dropped python3-ipaddr once python3.3 was default since it comes with ipaddress. For python3, everthing should use ipaddress. At some point it might make sense to switch. There's about 20 packages in the archive that use python-ipaddr versus none with one or two candidates using python-ipaddress in python2. Porting two is easier than porting 20. I'm also concerned that because of type processing differences (strings versus bytes and UTF-8 by default versus not) there is potential for subtle incompatibilities in the backported ipaddress. I had complaints on an upstream project that uses ipaddress with python3 when it was available failing with ipaddress in python2. Scott K -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2512839.pZrC1BOzKj@kitterma-e6430
