On 1/31/17 10:21, John W. O'Brien wrote:
> On 1/29/17 21:45, John W. O'Brien wrote:
>> At some point between 2017-01-17T07:39:59-05:00
>> 2017-01-23T10:48:15-05:00, some ports started failing to build under
>> python3.4 (not 3.5 or 3.6). The failure occurs during the poudriere
>> stage phase while
On 1/29/17 21:45, John W. O'Brien wrote:
> At some point between 2017-01-17T07:39:59-05:00
> 2017-01-23T10:48:15-05:00, some ports started failing to build under
> python3.4 (not 3.5 or 3.6). The failure occurs during the poudriere
> stage phase while processing the MANIFEST.in template. If the man
Hi Nikolai,
On 1/29/17 23:18, Nikolai Lifanov wrote:
> I think the biggest controversy is that binary names are suffixed, which
> may not be what upstream projects like and/or document.
> It may be confusing to users as well.
>
> If we can get rid of the suffix for PYTHON_CONCURRENT_INSTALL for
>
On 1/30/17 14:43, Roland Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 08:26:27PM -0500, John W. O'Brien wrote:
>> Thank you for your input.
>>
>> On 1/29/17 19:50, Roland Smith wrote:
>> [...]
>>> There also seems to be a trend of separate py3-* ports. This is sometimes a
>>> much better solution than tr
