| 1 |
El jue, 25-03-2010 a las 11:37 -0400, Richard Freeman escribió: |
| 2 |
> On 03/24/2010 11:47 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Even then, it'll likely get |
| 4 |
> > installed first, as users will probably learn about p.masking it only |
| 5 |
> > *after* they install it. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I don't have strong feelings on whether having v3 installed by default |
| 8 |
> is a big problem, but the last bit here probably should be addressed. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> The current news item only shows up for people with python 3.1 already |
| 11 |
> installed. Would it make sense to have it show up for anybody with any |
| 12 |
> version of python installed? Otherwise it is news after-the-fact. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Rich |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Hello |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Maybe I have misunderstood anything (since I don't know much about |
| 20 |
python stuff) but, what would occur if I forget to mask python-3 and |
| 21 |
don't run python-updater. My plans would be to try to delay |
| 22 |
python-updater running until I switch to use python3, because some |
| 23 |
machines I maintain are quite old and takes some time to re-emerge all |
| 24 |
python apps :-/ |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Thanks for the info |
Archives