>>>>> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> writes: ZJ> Please don't. This is a repeat of the original idea of having ZJ> separate python3 packages back when python3 was being ZJ> introduced. It seems that you are suggesting that pointless bureaucracy be kept in place purely because it slows down a process which you don't personally like. If so, that's awfully passive-aggressive. If someone does wish too create a separate python2 package via a package review, will you also attempt to obstruct that review? ZJ> This was always a huge pain and waste of maintainer time. I'm somewhat confused; you seem to wish to make it take more time, not less. ZJ> Doing this on any massive scale would means hundreds (up to 2800?) ZJ> "new" packages, a way to burn massive amounts of maintainer time. Has anyone at all suggested doing this on a massive scale? I certainly didn't. I only suggested making it easier to handle the case where a package maintainer simply doesn't want the python2 subpackage to be generated from the main package. I get the impression you took my suggestion and for whatever reason turned it into something else entirely. ZJ> Let's do this instead. We need more co-maintainership and more ZJ> co-operation in Fedora. But it has all of the problems I outlined. ZJ> Keeping an exisiting python2 subpackage is really no big deal. Perhaps for you. Perhaps not for others. If it was no big deal in all cases then why have any python2 packages been dropped at all? - J< _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
