Re: debian/pycompat usage?

2006-09-05 Thread Andreas Barth
* Floris Bruynooghe ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060828 12:02]:
> Secondly it should be noted that communication didn't go too good
> either since people in favour of the P-V fields didn't realise not
> everyone was happy with it and thought it was fine to go ahead with
> introducing it to unstable. 

Well, the main objector was present in Mexico in the BOF, but started a
bad campaing after being back from Mexico. That was not helpfull at all.

> It also took ages before the list was
> informed of what did happen during the BOF (not having the video's
> right away didn't help) which made matters even more obscure.

It wasn't directly on the plan that Matthias Klose fell ill in Mexico
(as did I), so, yes. The plan was to send a mail to d-python within 48
hours after the BOF.


Cheers,
Andi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: debian/pycompat usage?

2006-09-05 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le mardi 05 septembre 2006 à 16:54 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> Well, the main objector was present in Mexico in the BOF, but started a
> bad campaing after being back from Mexico. That was not helpfull at all.

Remember. I already expressed concerns during the BoF itself. Then, it
turned out later that the fields had unclear specifications and could
only be used by python-central itself.

There is at least a lesson to retain: the BoF itself was a bad idea from
the beginning.  I hope people won't make again the mistake to define
policies in a meeting.
-- 
 .''`.   Josselin Mouette/\./\
: :' :   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom


signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message	numériquement signée


Re: debian/pycompat usage?

2006-09-05 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 07:14:18PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 05 septembre 2006 à 16:54 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> > Well, the main objector was present in Mexico in the BOF, but started a
> > bad campaing after being back from Mexico. That was not helpfull at all.

> Remember. I already expressed concerns during the BoF itself. Then, it
> turned out later that the fields had unclear specifications and could
> only be used by python-central itself.

> There is at least a lesson to retain: the BoF itself was a bad idea from
> the beginning.  I hope people won't make again the mistake to define
> policies in a meeting.

I think the only lesson is to not invite you to such meetings, because
you'll piss on any attempt at building consensus anyway.

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.debian.org/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: debian/pycompat usage?

2006-09-05 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le mardi 05 septembre 2006 à 13:29 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> I think the only lesson is to not invite you to such meetings, because
> you'll piss on any attempt at building consensus anyway.

I think I have already told several times I won't participate again in
such a farce. You will not put my name on another so-called consensus.
-- 
 .''`.   Josselin Mouette/\./\
: :' :   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom


signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message	numériquement signée


Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-09-05 Thread Manoj Srivastava
Hi,

This is version 1.05 of the draft, now with typo fixes, and
 some initial policy support for partial upgrades for pure python
 public modules that are trying to drop support for older versions of
 python. The idea is that error cases are minimized if we do not drop
 a version of python in a new stable that was the default version in
 oldstable; at the same time insisting that every pre python public
 module that says "all" in the versions supported field must support
 all shipping versions of python in stable (even if this takes extra
 effort in the form of splitting off private modules and including them
 conditionally based on python version from a wrapper module that does
 little but conditional imports.

The current version, and future updates, are to be
 found at http://www.golden-gryphon.com/software/manoj-policy/

manoj

  Packaging with the new Python policy

A package developers view

  Manoj Srivastava

   Developer
   The Debian Project

   Copyright (c) 2006 Manoj Srivastava

   Revision History
   Revision 1.0.5   4^th November 2006
   Revision 1.0.4   12 Aug 2006
   Revision 1.0.3   10 Aug 2006
   Revision 1.0.2   8 Aug 2006
   Revision 1.0.1   07 Aug 2006
   Revision 1.0.0   31 Jul 2006

   Specification of the new Python policy. This article grew as an attempt to
   correct a gap in the concrete specification of the new Python policy, and
   has grown to be close to a formal specification of the proposed new
   policy.

   --

   Table of Contents

   1. [1]Introduction

1.1. [2]Acknowledgements

   2. [3]Goals of the new Python policy

   3. [4]Nomenclature and definitions

3.1. [5]Python versions

 3.1.1. [6]The Default Python version

3.2. [7]Categorization of Python software

   4. [8]General Notes

4.1. [9]Naming python module packages

4.2. [10]Python versions supported by the source

4.3. [11]Byte compilation

4.4. [12]Linking extention modules

4.5. [13]Depends:

4.6. [14]Provides

4.7. [15]Build-Depends:

4.8. [16]Deprecating "current" in versions supported

   5. [17]Recipe for developers

5.1. [18]Script

 5.1.1. [19]Supported versions

5.2. [20]Private Pure Python Modules

 5.2.1. [21]Byte compilation

 5.2.2. [22]Supported versions

5.3. [23]Private Extension

 5.3.1. [24]Supported versions

5.4. [25]Public pure Python Module

 5.4.1. [26]Byte compiling

 5.4.2. [27]Supported versions

 5.4.3. [28]Depends:

5.5. [29]Public Extension

 5.5.1. [30]Supported versions

 5.5.2. [31]Provides

   6. [32]Changing the default Python version

6.1. [33]Python rtupdate scripts

 6.1.1. [34]rtupdate script invocation

1. Introduction

 While trying to update SELinux packages, I ran across problems in trying
   to determine if my packages were complying with the new python policy: any
   practical tips for packaging generally devolved to the statement "Oh, just
   run dh_python". This is my attempt to offer more concrete tips for
   packaging. While this document started by reverse engineering dh_python,
   it has, thanks to help from various people more knowledgeable about Python
   than I, moved beyond that, and is closer to being a specification
   unfettered by the idiosyncrasies of current tools and implementations.

 So now this document is a draft formal specification of the proposed new
   Python packaging policy. While it draws upon earlier documents, notable
   [35]Debian Python Policy , and the [36]new policy Wiki, the [37]Debian
   Python FAQ, and the source code for dh_python, and debhelper scripts, it
   has essentially been written from scratch, with material reworded,
   reorganized, and rearranged, to the extent that it bears little
   resemblance to the original sources.

 Compiled Python modules are very dependent on the specific Python
   version they were compiled against, and may otherwise have restrictions on
   the versions of Python they are compatible with. Unless care is taken,
   introducing, or dropping, new versions of Python, or changing the default
   version, trigger long and often painful transitions where the archive is
   inconsistent, and the systems is ill-integrated for the duration. This new
   Python policy seeks to address these potential messy transitions, and
   minimize the pai

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-09-05 Thread Otavio Salvador
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:


>Copyright (c) 2006 Manoj Srivastava
>
>Revision History
>Revision 1.0.5   4^th November 2006
   Setember?

-- 
O T A V I OS A L V A D O R
-
 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  UIN: 5906116
 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio
-
"Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives
 you the whole house."


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]