Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 07:56:09PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > OK, I see I have to dot the i's and cross the t's for this > case here. So, here is the scenario: package python-foo packages a > public pure python module. Package bar imports the module > foo. Package baz is a packa

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:21:07 +1000, Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 19:56 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> Here there are two cases. Either module foo can't be written at all >> for version 2.6, or it the same functionality can be provided with > This is a littl

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:37:15 +0200, Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Le dim 13 août 2006 22:17, Manoj Srivastava a écrit : >>       As to the BOF thing, I'll bite: Why one earth did the bof >> come  up with design decisiosn that require  every single goldarned >> python  module package

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Robert Collins
On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 19:56 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >Here there are two cases. Either module foo can't be written at all >for version 2.6, or it the same functionality can be provided with This is a little simplistic. The parser changes fairly routinely in python versions. This me

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Manoj Srivastava
Hi, OK, I see I have to dot the i's and cross the t's for this case here. So, here is the scenario: package python-foo packages a public pure python module. Package bar imports the module foo. Package baz is a package not yet written that would be written for Python2.6 that would als

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Pierre Habouzit
Le dim 13 août 2006 22:17, Manoj Srivastava a écrit : >       As to the BOF thing, I'll bite: Why one earth did the bof come >  up with design decisiosn that require  every single goldarned python >  module package to be reuploaded every time a new version of python > is added or removed? actuall

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:28:43 -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 03:32:27AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:01:37 -0700, Steve Langasek >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> > On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 12:10:07PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrot

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 03:32:27AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:01:37 -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 12:10:07PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> >> 3.1.3. Provides > >> >> Packages with public modules and extensions shoul

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:01:37 -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 12:10:07PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> >> 3.1.3. Provides >> >> >> >> Packages with public modules and extensions should be named, or >> >> should provide, python-foo. Pure Python public

Re: dh_python and python policy analysis

2006-08-13 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 12:10:07PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> 3.1.3. Provides > >> > >> Packages with public modules and extensions should be named, or > >> should provide, python-foo. Pure Python public modules that support > >> all Python versions need not have a Provides field. > > .