Jeremy Katz wrote: > I really think that this needs to be resolved by making those apps work > better with more current versions of python. By that argument, what if > someone wanted to build an app which was only "supported" on a 2.4 > kernel -- would you argue that we should also add the infrastructure for > supporting a variety of incompatible kernel versions? Agreed, the right way is to make Zope work with python 2.4. But now, how to make that a reality ? Zope says : "Python 2.4.X will be supported when a security audit took place" I maintain the Zope rpm, but I sure can't do such a security audit. Does that mean Zope will remain unsupported in Fedora ? What alternative do we have ? > So now to upgrade Core from one version of python to another, I have to > touch every python app, even if they don't install files into > python_sitelib? No, if they don't install file into sitelib, they can run with whatever version was chosen by alternatives. Can't they ? > And not just a rebuild either, I have to make actual > changes to the included scripts. Where currently, if I just rebuild > with a "correct" python package, it will DTRT. The version change can probably be done inside the spec file. Most of the support for multiple pythons could be handled by the buildsystem automatically. I'm just proposing what I though we could do on the packager's side. But if we can improve upstream instead, it would be Better, and more in line with the Fedora Way. But will we do it ? Saying "we should improve upstream instead" and doing nothing is not going to help anyone. I wish I could help the upstream audit Zope on python 2.4, but that is way above my knowledge at the moment. Aurélien -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard@xxxxxxxxx "Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon." -- Susan Ertz -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
