Re: Proposed update to the python policy

[Pierre Habouzit, 22.03.2007] > On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 10:13:40PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > > [Josselin Mouette, 22.03.2007] > > > Le jeudi 22 mars 2007 à 19:56 +0100, Pierre Habouzit a écrit : > > > > > Just nitpicking: the dh_ tool doesn't need to know that, as it can > > > > > guess > >

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

[Steve Langasek, 22.03.2007] > On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 01:36:08PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > > yes, but since package is depending only on python-dev (and not > > python-all-dev), > > python- should assume "current" by default (and add it to > > XB-Python-Version > > so that there will be no

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 09:58:18AM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > > - relying on Build-Depends to indicate whether a package builds "current" or > > "all" doesn't seem to leave a way to differentiate between packages that > > follow the new policy and really /are/ binNMUable, from those that d

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

[Steve Langasek, 23.03.2007] > On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 09:58:18AM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > > > - relying on Build-Depends to indicate whether a package builds "current" > > > or > > > "all" doesn't seem to leave a way to differentiate between packages that > > > follow the new policy an

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 10:39:45AM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > [Steve Langasek, 23.03.2007] > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 09:58:18AM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > > > > - relying on Build-Depends to indicate whether a package builds > > > > "current" or > > > > "all" doesn't seem to leave a

Re: corner abalone

We told you watch NNYR Yesterday +25% in 1 day It.s only just begun Northamerican Energy Group Corp. Symbol : NNYR 5 day Expected : $0.50 ( 500% profit ) Get in tomorrow or get left out!! This is going to double in next 2 days Real Comp with Real Products Get in tomorrow or be left out!! got 25

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

[Pierre Habouzit, 23.03.2007] > current in X?-P-V sucks a lot because X?-P-V explains which python > version the package supports, whereas current is not about that but > about the kind of packaging ways it has. This information should never > have been folded in the same field, I only recently g

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 à 13:40 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit : > XB-Python-Type: "multiple" (compile for all installed [and supported by > the package] Python versions) or "single" (only for one Python version) > > That looks good to me And how do you ensure that this matches what's actu

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 05:08:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 à 13:40 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit : > > XB-Python-Type: "multiple" (compile for all installed [and supported by > > the package] Python versions) or "single" (only for one Python version) > > > >

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

[Pierre Habouzit, 23.03.2007] > On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 05:08:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 à 13:40 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit : > > > XB-Python-Type: "multiple" (compile for all installed [and supported by > > > the package] Python versions) or "single" (on

Re: Proposed update to the python policy

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 06:47:03PM +0100, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > [Pierre Habouzit, 23.03.2007] > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 05:08:22PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > > Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 à 13:40 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit : > > > > XB-Python-Type: "multiple" (compile for all installe