[gentoo-python] unmasking python-3.3

[gentoo-python] unmasking python-3.3

[Patrick McLean]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Python-3.3.1 is now in the tree and passes all tests and none of the bugs in
the Python 3.3 tracker (437322) appear to be blockers. I want add Python 3.3
to ~arch in 7 days (on May 6th).

Does anyone have any objections to this?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=gBJA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-python] unmasking python-3.3

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Patrick McLean <chutzpah@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Python-3.3.1 is now in the tree and passes all tests and none of the bugs in
> the Python 3.3 tracker (437322) appear to be blockers. I want add Python 3.3
> to ~arch in 7 days (on May 6th).
>
> Does anyone have any objections to this?

I have none, but Mike G. should sign off on it before you go ahead, IMO.

(No need to wait until May 6th on my account, either.)

Cheers,

Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-python] unmasking python-3.3

[Michał Górny]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:53:30 -0700
Patrick McLean <chutzpah@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Python-3.3.1 is now in the tree and passes all tests and none of the bugs in
> the Python 3.3 tracker (437322) appear to be blockers. I want add Python 3.3
> to ~arch in 7 days (on May 6th).

Just please to remember to unmask the relevant PYTHON_TARGETS
and PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET flags as well,

- -- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
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=MNYj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-python] unmasking python-3.3

[Mike Gilbert]

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Patrick McLean <chutzpah@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Python-3.3.1 is now in the tree and passes all tests and none of the bugs in
>> the Python 3.3 tracker (437322) appear to be blockers. I want add Python 3.3
>> to ~arch in 7 days (on May 6th).
>>
>> Does anyone have any objections to this?
>
> I have none, but Mike G. should sign off on it before you go ahead, IMO.
>

As I indicated in IRC, it's ok by me.

Arfrever brought up a good point: we should adjust the default value
of PYTHON_TARGETS as specified in the base profile. I think we will
need to include both python3_2 and python3_3 until dev-lang/python-3.3
has been stabilized on relevant archs.

We will also need to stable-mask the python_targets_python3_3 and
python_single_target_python3_3 use flags.

Re: [gentoo-python] unmasking python-3.3

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1086 bytes --]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:27:58 -0400
Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Patrick McLean <chutzpah@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> Python-3.3.1 is now in the tree and passes all tests and none of the bugs in
> >> the Python 3.3 tracker (437322) appear to be blockers. I want add Python 3.3
> >> to ~arch in 7 days (on May 6th).
> >>
> >> Does anyone have any objections to this?
> >
> > I have none, but Mike G. should sign off on it before you go ahead, IMO.
> >
> 
> As I indicated in IRC, it's ok by me.
> 
> Arfrever brought up a good point: we should adjust the default value
> of PYTHON_TARGETS as specified in the base profile. I think we will
> need to include both python3_2 and python3_3 until dev-lang/python-3.3
> has been stabilized on relevant archs.

We shouldn't have two versions of Python 3 enabled by default. This
will result in packages supporting only one of them to push
REQUIRED_USE on users.


-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 966 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-python] unmasking python-3.3

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:39 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Arfrever brought up a good point: we should adjust the default value
>> of PYTHON_TARGETS as specified in the base profile. I think we will
>> need to include both python3_2 and python3_3 until dev-lang/python-3.3
>> has been stabilized on relevant archs.
>
> We shouldn't have two versions of Python 3 enabled by default. This
> will result in packages supporting only one of them to push
> REQUIRED_USE on users.

Yeah, holding off on adding python3_3 to the default TARGETS until
it's been stabilized (and then replacing 3.2 so we keep having only
one 3.x in there) seems better.

Cheers,

Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-python] unmasking python-3.3

[Mike Gilbert]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:39 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> Arfrever brought up a good point: we should adjust the default value
>>> of PYTHON_TARGETS as specified in the base profile. I think we will
>>> need to include both python3_2 and python3_3 until dev-lang/python-3.3
>>> has been stabilized on relevant archs.
>>
>> We shouldn't have two versions of Python 3 enabled by default. This
>> will result in packages supporting only one of them to push
>> REQUIRED_USE on users.
>
> Yeah, holding off on adding python3_3 to the default TARGETS until
> it's been stabilized (and then replacing 3.2 so we keep having only
> one 3.x in there) seems better.
>

Alright. I'm sure there will be some whining about "sane defaults"
from somebody either way we go.

I guess it makes more sense to set defaults based on what is available
to the stable tree.

Re: [gentoo-python] unmasking python-3.3

[Patrick McLean]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 30/04/13 08:25 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:39 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>> Arfrever brought up a good point: we should adjust the default value of PYTHON_TARGETS as specified in the base profile. I think we will 
>>>> need to include both python3_2 and python3_3 until dev-lang/python-3.3 has been stabilized on relevant archs.
>>> 
>>> We shouldn't have two versions of Python 3 enabled by default. This will result in packages supporting only one of them to push REQUIRED_USE
>>> on users.
>> 
>> Yeah, holding off on adding python3_3 to the default TARGETS until it's been stabilized (and then replacing 3.2 so we keep having only one 3.x
>> in there) seems better.
>> 
> 
> Alright. I'm sure there will be some whining about "sane defaults" from somebody either way we go.
> 
> I guess it makes more sense to set defaults based on what is available to the stable tree.
> 

Yes, I think we should definitely add it to ~arch, but not to the default PYTHON_TARGETS, USE_PYTHON until they are ready to go stable.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=+hx6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----