| 1 |
2011-05-17 20:24:16 Mark Loeser napisał(a): |
| 2 |
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <Arfrever@g.o> said: |
| 3 |
> > > I second that. Why do we need to make all the work fixing packages |
| 4 |
> > > instead of letting upstream do their job? I am not so excited to |
| 5 |
> > > fix every package I maintain as it is quite possible to introduce |
| 6 |
> > > regressions in the process. Furthermore, I don't understand your first |
| 7 |
> > > message. You say that you will provide xml.use_pyxml() function on |
| 8 |
> > > python-2.7. Is this code official or you are just patching the official |
| 9 |
> > > python releases? |
| 10 |
> > > Anyway, as I said, I'd rather wait for upstream to fix their packages |
| 11 |
> > > instead of me. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > Some upstreams are dead and some packages using PyXML will never be ported by upstreams to use |
| 14 |
> > something else than PyXML (e.g. lxml). |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Then those packages should get removed from the tree. Do not start |
| 17 |
> introducing Gentoo specific hacks to work around the problem. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Majority of packages from http://tinderbox.dev.gentoo.org/misc/rindex/dev-python/pyxml seem to |
| 20 |
have active upstreams, which doesn't mean they are actively working on porting these packages |
| 21 |
to use something else than PyXML. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis |
Archives