On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 11:24 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 11/25/2013 03:07 AM, Matthias Runge wrote: > > Hey, > > > > recently, I saw a few requests to update python-django to > > Django-1.6, the corresponding bug is [1]. > > > > As there are quite a few changes, I'd expect this update to be > > harmful, at least - python-django-openstack-auth - > > openstack-dashboard > > > > will break, and won't even build any more (because they also > > execute sanity checks during build). > > > > So, the current plan is, to fix both packages upstream and then to > > update python-django to Django 1.6 in rawhide. I'd expect this to > > happen within the next two weeks and I'd update python-django to > > Django-1.6 around Dec 16th. > > > > Because of bad timing, we won't have Django-1.6 in f20. > > > > This is kind of why I keep coming back to: "Why do we have > python-django at all?" I don't really see any reason why we shouldn't > kill off the python-django package and just carry 'python-django15' > and 'python-django16' packages with a conflict. > > The number of incompatibilities between releases is such that I don't > think we really want to be forcing upgrades on other packages at all. > We should just be carrying whichever two versions are supported by > upstream at any given time. Upstream is very good about maintaining > bugfixes and security fixes in both supported streams. +1 by changing version the current way, the only ting we can guarantee is a lot of broken packages all the time. Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
