-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/28/2013 02:16 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Thu 28 Feb 2013 06:58:36 AM EST, Matthias Runge wrote: >> Dear list, > >> Django 1.5 was released about two days ago. I'd like to push a >> build to rawhide, but I assume, that will break many dependent >> packages. > >> The plan is, to delay the push, until other packages are fixed, >> or to push in about 14 days. > >> I have a scratch-build build ready, one might to try, it should >> install cleanly e.g. on Fedora 18. > >> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3880/5063880/python-django-1.5-1.fc19.noarch.rpm > >> > How many Django-based packages are we talking about? Should we be > considering putting things together in a side tag before landing > in Rawhide? Well, looking at my list of ~40 python-django packages, I know by coincidence just a single package to be compatible with Django-1.5 > Looking at the release notes[1], there is a sizeable number of > backwards-incompatible changes present in this new version. I > think it's going to bite us if we force it straight into Rawhide at > this point. Given the way that Django tends to operate > (backwards-incompatible releases about every six months with only > the current and previous release supported for bugfixes and > security), I'm wondering if we shouldn't just drop the > 'python-django' package entirely and go with 'python-django14', > 'python-django15', etc. from here until eternity, retiring > unsupported versions only between upstream releases. This is a > policy that would probably also work acceptably for EPEL (CCed). That seems to be a good proposal for me. Review request is here[1], based on the current python-django package. Shouldn't be an issue. For EPEL, we have the Django14 package. This shouldn't change there, but we can think about introducing provides: python-django14 there. Also, IMHO the number of incompatible changes became less and less disruptive in the past, and I see this as maturing of the project. > > Also, Django 1.5's release notes[2] indicate that it now has > support for Python 3.2 and later. I'd strongly recommend that we > should be dual-building python3-django15 as well here. > Yes, I was thinking about a python3-django feature for F20, as it's absolutely too late for this as a feature for F19, right? As there is at least /usr/bin/django-admin provided by the package, we should decide, if that should be coming from the python3 package, if the python3 version should carry a python3 (or just a 3) in it's name, or what to do else. Matthias [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=916676 - -- Matthias Runge <mrunge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mrunge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRL4IzAAoJEOnz8qQwcaIWygcIAJ+7J4B+nabmV4eSaMguNmXM F81PcSf/HjLQQSeFi2n3CFfM+ZcYnTbBJ+rDKXmIUDLGRRu6tgtOduX8s4x9oQto 4BshL7njsBK3fEKUFJYY2xoJyEC8fmZbzaQ5uZyM1Tqa88vjo/SSYPluiRUWrtL8 pTt3U/7HN3bU/8byzxLyWxtyaf0z+GJvYYGjZlVN+s+aCOeGbYoi3JFLQZ8ZFI7i sz+96VVxYWY8hm7uHn7xUzuh3LoDsYFvsNuGfmT2zliHkSmGnO5RI18w/kW9sbtG gPWtHhWpV/kIWiJhLxakImWQ0XNZx72T0wXWA+usVqJ7HVe6nhDGl09E+jXasU0= =pDV1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
