| 1 |
Mark Loeser wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dawid Węgliński <cla@g.o> said: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> You mix it up. Portage works with python 3.1. If an user switches to python |
| 5 |
>> 3.1 as the main interpreter, it's possible that his own scripts won't work. |
| 6 |
>> Marking it stable sometine in november give's some time to ebuilds |
| 7 |
>> maintainers to fix their python based apps just like it's done with gcc |
| 8 |
>> stabilization. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> And you are mixing that up. We never mark GCC stable before we fix |
| 12 |
> everything we have identified as a problem, or pretty close to |
| 13 |
> everything. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
That will be the next thing he wants to stabilize without testing. I |
| 18 |
been using Gentoo for more than 5 years and this is the first time I |
| 19 |
ever recall someone wanting to mark something stable that has not been |
| 20 |
tested for quite some time and in the normal way. Add in that this is |
| 21 |
something that portage itself depends on, this just sounds like a really |
| 22 |
bad idea. I hope someone puts a hold on this. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Dale |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
:-) :-) |
Archives