| 1 |
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:10:13 +0200 |
| 2 |
Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > I don't think it's reasonable to have Python 2.4-2.6 in Portage tree |
| 5 |
> > keyworded stable (and therefore considered to be supported) and |
| 6 |
> > know for sure that it's just a matter of time when somebody have to |
| 7 |
> > recompile it and boom! half of Python modules stop working. I |
| 8 |
> > daresay these cases should be handled too. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Well, I wouldn't say half of Python modules, but I agree that we |
| 11 |
> should probably revbump the others, too. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Don't forget to apply distutils patches for 3.* as well :P. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
/me hides. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
Best regards, |
| 19 |
Michał Górny |
Archives