List Archive: gentoo-python
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
Den 2011-09-16 17:51:09 skrev Matthew Summers <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <email@example.com> wrote:
>> I think it would be good to take the upstream patch and apply it to
>> our packages. We might even do this for all the old versions. However,
>> in the simple case that would mean revbumping 6 slots and requesting
>> restabilization, for something excessively tiny (which doesn't cause
>> issues for any Python built while running a pre-3.0 kernel). Is there
>> a way we can slip this in without revbumping for older versions,
>> keeping the stable keywords? Should we consult gentoo-dev about it?
> Glad this is fixed upstream and in Gentoo! As far as slipping this
> into older, stable packages without a revbump, I strongly urge against
> this course of action. Worst case and since its perceived as a pain,
> just don't bother with stabilizing the older versions until there is
> another release, if ever.
> If you have questions about policy, this seems to be QA related, so
> ask one of the team.
But when Linux 3.x goes stable, stable Python versions suddenly became
I don't think it's reasonable to have Python 2.4-2.6 in Portage tree
keyworded stable (and therefore considered to be supported) and know for
sure that it's just a matter of time when somebody have to recompile it
and boom! half of Python modules stop working. I daresay these cases
should be handled too.