| 1 |
On 03/24/2010 02:28 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:04:51 +0100 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar |
| 3 |
> Arahesis<Arfrever@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> People, don't want Python 3, probably have already masked it. There |
| 5 |
>> is no reason to waste Council's time for decision on what sentence |
| 6 |
>> should be included in the news item. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Not the folks running the stable tree, because they don't know about |
| 9 |
> it. They're not following the discussion here on -dev. They're going |
| 10 |
> to get unpleasantly surprised when it shows up in their next world |
| 11 |
> update. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Include instructions on how to mask it if desired in the news item. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Will not masking python-3 cause anything to break in any way? Do users |
| 16 |
need to do anything to make python-2.6 or whatever the default |
| 17 |
interpreter (instructions for using eselect python are not given in the |
| 18 |
news item)? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
If the only potential issue is that users might have a few extra files |
| 21 |
installed that they don't need but which won't cause them problems, then |
| 22 |
I don't know that we need to instruct users to create masks. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
If having python-3 will cause stable users problems, then we probably |
| 25 |
shouldn't be stabilizing it anyway. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Compared to the KDE 3->4 migration this is probably going to be a fairly |
| 28 |
minor issue for most stable users, unless we're expecting breakage. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Rich |
Archives