Re: Proposal: Reorganizing Python for Python2 (and fixes for the previous proposal)

2001-01-14 Thread Peter Eckersley
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 02:10:25PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: > Moshe Zadka wrote: > > s/posible/certain/ > > Python 2.1 already contains many features future programs will be > > able to use. (It's not out now, but alpha is supposed to be released > > in a few days) > > > OTOH, all Python programs

Re: Proposal: Reorganizing Python for Python2 (and fixes for the previous proposal)

2001-01-14 Thread Joey Hess
Moshe Zadka wrote: > s/posible/certain/ > Python 2.1 already contains many features future programs will be > able to use. (It's not out now, but alpha is supposed to be released > in a few days) > OTOH, all Python programs in Debian *should* work with 2.0. If they > do not, then they have a bug

Re: Proposal: we don't need multiple installs

2001-01-14 Thread Moshe Zadka
On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Claudemir Todo Bom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I mean, use the non-free archive only to solve license compatibility It can't. See the KDE/Qt issue. -- Moshe Zadka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This is a signature anti-virus. Please stop the spread of signature viruses!

Re: Proposal: we don't need multiple installs

2001-01-14 Thread Claudemir Todo Bom
Moshe Zadka wrote: > > On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Claudemir Todo Bom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I have a question: Why don't use the non-free archive? > > Because Python is free? (Moshe: I'm posting this to the list because I think it is usefull there... my first posting directly to you was a m

Proposal: we don't need multiple installs

2001-01-14 Thread Claudemir Todo Bom
Hi folks, I think that the only reason we have for multiple installations of python is the licensing compatibility thing. If I'm wrong, please correct me now and ignore the rest of the post. I have a question: Why don't use the non-free archive? I think that this can be acomplished in the follo

Re: Proposal: Reorganizing Python for Python2 (and fixes for the previous proposal)

2001-01-14 Thread Junichi Uekawa
In Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:32:49 +0200 (IST) Moshe Zadka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit : > OTOH, all Python programs in Debian *should* work with 2.0. If they > do not, then they have a bug -- and it should be fixed. > So, as a Perl basher , I think Python will not cause the same > probl

Re: Proposal: Reorganizing Python for Python2 (and fixes for the previous proposal)

2001-01-14 Thread Moshe Zadka
On Sat, 13 Jan 2001 16:25:44 -0800, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is where I begin getting flashbacks to the whole perl SNAFU. Is it > possible for a python program to use python 2.0 features and not work > with 1.5? Yes, that it possible, and even likely for programs written now.

Re: Proposal: Reorganizing Python for Python2 (and fixes for the previous proposal)

2001-01-14 Thread Joey Hess
Disclaimer: I don't know much about python. I just want to make sure that you're not making the same mistakes that were made when perl was modified so multiple versions could be installed at one time. > . Python 1.5 was installed and we decide to install 2.0 > python 1.5 specific package