From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MpO9t-00018x-LA for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:17:02 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 23551E07D2; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:17:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.240]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02AB4E07D2 for ; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:16:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d40so3273146and.1 for ; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:16:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tJ7caQ+aIWGRsa3RF3XTCIBK8vegafpe0QW61ViCdQY=; b=XfvVh5OTRoQnQVTZqXuseQRI4eCWTXHPHTk3n+XhN6iXBLCOhzU8Y/lGS6GMK9yKwC quV3fkxnbxnXiWJ9tiyvhCFrtlH6pKsN2Ewj2tJJMj0G3K14vjJxb5arXvA2brvk+N85 NhAvV67KM692cGY1McqRZQUT2MzMYjtY/aTZM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=F5eCVjIvD/64aQw+GYDMLmtyyusS2fUbUMMXGDKpLovJ7DznTiGskeH8Y0oHg1VvRv T73lAfHthgYxgxa8fVVoWaa9VQMIFeE1vTLFKponRBV9sj7Pr+loqabyGXZadankIl5O MzonY5frzplLDlY/uiq4HUczKhGr75hPCGoLM= Received: by 10.101.33.5 with SMTP id l5mr3439984anj.44.1253459819748; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:16:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.1? (adsl-144-216-98.jan.bellsouth.net [70.144.216.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d12sm1568714and.18.2009.09.20.08.16.58 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:16:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4AB64769.4010805@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 10:16:57 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090905 SeaMonkey/1.1.17 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1 References: <200909191848.33225.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <1253381283.31816.9.camel@TesterBox.tester.ca> <4AB55BFC.4070205@gmail.com> <200909200041.32652.cla@gentoo.org> <19e69baf3d2d95babe2abc5f89c4322d@localhost> In-Reply-To: <19e69baf3d2d95babe2abc5f89c4322d@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 5d36893e-e236-48d3-a0ac-6de7b1b382da X-Archives-Hash: 53686b0cc6ced8f5a2dce80a22273c35 Jes=C3=BAs Guerrero wrote: > On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 00:41:32 +0200, Dawid W=C4=99gli=C5=84ski > wrote: > =20 >> On Sunday 20 of September 2009 00:32:28 Dale wrote: >> =20 >>>> ~arch is for testing ebuilds, not the upstream package >>>> =20 >>> So it would be OK to mark something "stable" even tho portage itself >>> doesn't work with it? Sorry, this makes no sense to me. I run stabl= e >>> for the most part and having a package that portage depends on that i= s >>> not stable just sounds a little like putting the cart before the hors= e. >>> >>> See some of the other replies as to why this is a not so good idea. >>> >>> Dale >>> >>> :-) :-) >>> =20 >> You mix it up. Portage works with python 3.1. If an user switches to >> python=20 >> 3.1 as the main interpreter, it's possible that his own scripts won't >> work.=20 >> =20 > > Yes? > > # eselect python set 2 > # emerge -s foo > File "/usr/bin/emerge", line 41 > except PermissionDenied, e: > ^ > SyntaxError: invalid syntax > > > Ummm, yes, it works *beautifully*, you see. Nothing else to add. > > =20 >> Marking it stable sometine in november give's some time to ebuilds=20 >> maintainers to fix their python based apps just like it's done with gc= c=20 >> stabilization. >> =20 > > That's not the usual case. In Gentoo we have a serious policy of not > marking as stable things until it has passed one month without any seri= ous > bug report about it. And you are proposing to break this rule for a cor= e > piece of the OS, right, wonderful.=20 > > Instead I say, first fix the stuff, and then we can start planning the > switch to 3.1 > > =20 My point exactly. No package, especially a core package that portage depends on, should just be thrown into the tree and just assume that it will work for everyone else.=20 Dale :-) :-)=20