Bug#563391: Package Trac 0.12 as well
I've updated the Trac packaging in svn://svn.debian.org/svn/python-apps/packages/trac/trunk to 0.12 and done some migration and cleaning up (see debian/changelog for details). There are a few questions remaining: - Is the run-time dependency on python-setuptools required (or should it only be Build-Depends)? - There is a debian/package-it script that seems to do something similar to svn-buildpackage. Should it be removed? The package hasn't been tested yet and the trac plugins also need to be checked to see if they still work (maybe add Breaks where needed). Any help with testing is appreciated. If anyone could take a look at the packaging (I changed quite a lot) that would also be nice. -- -- arthur - adej...@debian.org - http://people.debian.org/~adejong -- signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Accepted python-defaults 2.7.2-3 (source all)
* Matthias Klose , 2011-07-10, 19:34: Changes: python-defaults (2.7.2-3) experimental; urgency=low . * python: Provide python profiler. * Provide a python2 symlink according to PEP 394. Excuse me, what? AFAICT status of PEP 384 is "Draft"? Was this change discussed here? Was this change discussed with *anybody* in Debian? One would have thought that adding a symlink, which only purpose is to encourage gratuitous breaking compatibility, is not in line with Debian culture of technical excellence. -- Jakub Wilk -- 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/20110710225334.ga5...@jwilk.net
Re: Accepted python-defaults 2.7.2-3 (source all)
On Sunday, July 10, 2011 06:53:34 PM Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Matthias Klose , 2011-07-10, 19:34: > >Changes: > > python-defaults (2.7.2-3) experimental; urgency=low > > . > > > > * python: Provide python profiler. > > * Provide a python2 symlink according to PEP 394. > > Excuse me, what? AFAICT status of PEP 384 is "Draft"? > > Was this change discussed here? Was this change discussed with *anybody* > in Debian? > > One would have thought that adding a symlink, which only purpose is to > encourage gratuitous breaking compatibility, is not in line with Debian > culture of technical excellence. It was discussed and as the decision was to not deviate from upstream, so I don't understand this either. Fortunately it's only in experimental. I do not think this should go into Unstable (or Ubuntu, but that's a topic for another list). 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/201107102126.30450.deb...@kitterman.com
