1 |
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 02:41:28PM -0400, Richard Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> On 03/24/2010 02:28 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote: |
3 |
> > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:04:51 +0100 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar |
4 |
> > Arahesis<Arfrever@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
> >> People, don't want Python 3, probably have already masked it. There |
6 |
> >> is no reason to waste Council's time for decision on what sentence |
7 |
> >> should be included in the news item. |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > Not the folks running the stable tree, because they don't know about |
10 |
> > it. They're not following the discussion here on -dev. They're going |
11 |
> > to get unpleasantly surprised when it shows up in their next world |
12 |
> > update. |
13 |
> > |
14 |
> > Include instructions on how to mask it if desired in the news item. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Will not masking python-3 cause anything to break in any way? Do users |
17 |
> need to do anything to make python-2.6 or whatever the default |
18 |
> interpreter (instructions for using eselect python are not given in the |
19 |
> news item)? |
20 |
|
21 |
I'm not the python maintainer, but as I understand it,python-2.6 will |
22 |
be the default interpretor until it is changed manually. |
23 |
|
24 |
> If the only potential issue is that users might have a few extra files |
25 |
> installed that they don't need but which won't cause them problems, then |
26 |
> I don't know that we need to instruct users to create masks. |
27 |
|
28 |
AFAIK, this is the issue. If python-3 is installed, it will cause |
29 |
extra files to be installed, not justin python-3, but any packages that |
30 |
support both python-2 and python-3 will potentially get files installed |
31 |
for both versions of python. |
32 |
|
33 |
> If having python-3 will cause stable users problems, then we probably |
34 |
> shouldn't be stabilizing it anyway. |
35 |
|
36 |
AFAIK, the only "problem" we are debating about is the extra files |
37 |
being installed. |
38 |
|
39 |
William |