On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 20:40 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote: > 2008/12/9 Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet@xxxxxxxxx>: > > On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 13:05 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote: > >> 2008/12/9 Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx>: > >> > So let me reiterate: > >> > > >> > * python-3.x will not be in Fedora-11 unless it becomes obvious in the > >> > next few weeks that we absolutely must be running it for the next release. > >> > * we need more experience with python-2.6+ & python-3 compatibility > >> > before we decide whether parallel versions of python are necessary. > >> > > >> > .. _[1]: http://python-incompatibility.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/README.txt > >> > > >> > -Toshio > >> > >> > >> Well again. Some people (like Toshio) seem to have a grasp on the > >> matter. All this banter hasn't produced anything more of use. How > >> about forming a temp SIG to take care of this trusting they do the > >> right thing? > > > > As opposed to the Python SIG that already exists? > > No. Seems like the ideal body to come to a decision and let the rest > of us know. Well, most of the active members of the Python SIG have chimed in on this, and we're all channeling Frankie. Now, I do believe this is an important subject and we do need to gauge the impact Python 3000 has on Fedora, but I believe that we are grossly unequipped to do so at this time. I'd like to revisit this topic in about a year (perhaps sooner, depending on circumstances), but for now everyone just relax. -- Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet@xxxxxxxxx> PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
