Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Donovan Baarda
On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 02:51, Alexandre Fayolle wrote: > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 01:35:42PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > > Alexandre Fayolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > > OK, so keep them around until the version in question is dropped from > > the archive? > > This would be nice. Or un

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Domenico Andreoli
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 06:51:14PM +0200, Alexandre Fayolle wrote: ... > > > > > > -1 > > > ... > > My fault, I thought I was on python-dev (where -1 stands for 'I vote > against this', see http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0010.html) > this was interesting... -[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Alexandre Fayolle
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 01:35:42PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > Alexandre Fayolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:53:07AM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > >> But it is OK to drop 2.1/2.2 support for packages that nothing depends on? > > > > -1 > > > if -1: >pri

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Andreas Rottmann
Alexandre Fayolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:53:07AM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: >> But it is OK to drop 2.1/2.2 support for packages that nothing depends on? > > -1 > if -1: print "parsed as true" else: print "parsed as false" > > Developers are using such

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Alexandre Fayolle
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:53:07AM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > But it is OK to drop 2.1/2.2 support for packages that nothing depends on? -1 Developers are using such packages to check that their work will work on several python versions. For example, I recently had to work for a customer

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-10 Thread Andreas Rottmann
Jim Penny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 21:27:16 +0200 > Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for >> multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for >> the old Python version

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Ben Burton
> > - python2.1 is needed at least by zope and jython > > Would it still be needed in sarge if zope2.6.1 & jython were built > against python2.2? It's not a case of jython building against python 2.2 (in fact, it doesn't build-depend on any version of python at all). It's a case of jython provi

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Ron Johnson
On Tue, 2003-09-09 at 15:24, Matthias Klose wrote: > Andreas Rottmann writes: > > Hi! > > > > I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for > > multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for > > the old Python versions. IMHO, this should be documented somewh

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Jim Penny
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 21:27:16 +0200 Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for > multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for > the old Python versions. IMHO, this should be documented somewhere > (P

Re: Support for Python2.1 and Python2.2

2003-09-09 Thread Matthias Klose
Andreas Rottmann writes: > Hi! > > I wonder how long source packages that build binary packages for > multiple versions (2.{1,2,3}) should continue to build packages for > the old Python versions. IMHO, this should be documented somewhere > (Policy?). Is there any timeline how long Python 2.2 and