On 28/03/11 at 14:08 +0530, Deepak Tripathi wrote:
> At Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:59:47 +0100,
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> Lucas/Antonio,
> Thanks for all your good work, going through all mail thread and wiki, I have
> couple of questions.
>
> 1) All existing packages will be renamed or only new pack
At Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:59:47 +0100,
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
Lucas/Antonio,
Thanks for all your good work, going through all mail thread and wiki, I have
couple of questions.
1) All existing packages will be renamed or only new packages will be updated.
2) After renaming, package will be in experim
On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> What is the correct way to override what dpkg-shlibdeps detects?
Either you replace the dependency associated to the interpreters' libraries
by providing debian/shlibs.local (or any other file that you indicate with
-L) or you tell dpkg-shlibdeps to put
On 10/03/11 at 12:00 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2011-03-10, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > On 09/03/11 at 22:27 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> >> Lucas Nussbaum writes ("Ruby changes for Wheezy"):
> >> > We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby
On 2011-03-10, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 09/03/11 at 22:27 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Lucas Nussbaum writes ("Ruby changes for Wheezy"):
>> > We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby packaging for
>> > Debian wheezy, and would app
On 09/03/11 at 22:27 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum writes ("Ruby changes for Wheezy"):
> > We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby packaging for
> > Debian wheezy, and would appreciate some external feedback on our
> > proposals.
>
Lucas Nussbaum writes ("Ruby changes for Wheezy"):
> We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby packaging for
> Debian wheezy, and would appreciate some external feedback on our
> proposals.
>
> Our plans are described on
> http://wiki.debian.org/Tea
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Josselin Mouette, 2011-03-06]
> > You might “like” Breaks, but this:
> > Depends: python
> > Breaks: python (>= 2.8), python (<< 2.5)
> > has the same semantics as:
> > Depends: python (>= 2.5), python (<< 2.8)
>
> Yes it does; if you will
[Josselin Mouette, 2011-03-06]
> Le samedi 05 mars 2011 à 00:22 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit :
> > > Breaks: python (>= 2.8), python (<< 2.5)
> >
> > yeah, that's to avoid bug reports when someone will try to use this
> > package with (default) python 2.4 or python 2.8 (which will NEVER be
> >
OoO En cette fin de matinée radieuse du dimanche 06 mars 2011, vers
11:40, Lucas Nussbaum disait :
> Note that, for applications written in Ruby and packaged in Debian, we
> will make sure that they work no matter what /usr/bin/ruby points to (if
> necessary, by forcing the shebang to ruby1.
Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 11:40 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> Note that, for applications written in Ruby and packaged in Debian, we
> will make sure that they work no matter what /usr/bin/ruby points to (if
> necessary, by forcing the shebang to ruby1.8, and installing the correct
> dependen
On 06/03/11 at 11:22 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:58 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > > You are just going to empower users to shoot themselves in the foot.
> >
> > What if users want the ability to shoot themselves in the foot?
>
> Currently you’re the one h
Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:58 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > You are just going to empower users to shoot themselves in the foot.
>
> What if users want the ability to shoot themselves in the foot?
Currently you’re the one holding the weapon.
> Also, you seem to assume that Ruby 1.9 is
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 10:58:47AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 06/03/11 at 10:43 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:10 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > > I prefer the situation where we empower users to make the switch if they
> > > decide to, to the situatio
On 06/03/11 at 10:43 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:10 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > I prefer the situation where we empower users to make the switch if they
> > decide to, to the situation where we arbitrarily decide that users
> > should use Ruby 1.8 with no
Le samedi 05 mars 2011 à 00:22 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit :
> > Breaks: python (>= 2.8), python (<< 2.5)
>
> yeah, that's to avoid bug reports when someone will try to use this
> package with (default) python 2.4 or python 2.8 (which will NEVER be
> released, BTW). dh_python2 will create simi
Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:10 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> I prefer the situation where we empower users to make the switch if they
> decide to, to the situation where we arbitrarily decide that users
> should use Ruby 1.8 with no ability to change this (and get bug reports
> for that). No
On 06/03/11 at 10:02 +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Lucas Nussbaum schrieb:
>
> >That's what we plan to do: for now, ruby1.8 is the default
> >implementation/version, and will have the highest priority in
> >alternatives. So switching to say jruby would require manual
> >intervention.
Lucas Nussbaum schrieb:
>That's what we plan to do: for now, ruby1.8 is the default
>implementation/version, and will have the highest priority in
>alternatives. So switching to say jruby would require manual
>intervention.
Exactly that will ensure you run into a mess. Don't allow to switch
[Adrian von Bidder, 2011-03-04]
> The way it's done is that the packages declare what versions of python they
> support:
>
> python-pygments, for example:
python-pygments uses dh_python2 which takes a little bit different
approach than dh_pycentral or dh_pysupport.
dh_python2 ships all symlinks
Heyho!
On Friday 04 March 2011 14.16:34 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Sorry, could you explain how it works in python, when a given binary
> package contains stuff for both python 2.6 and 2.7, for example?
I'm not involved with Python packages, so somebody correct me please.
The way it's done is that
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 02:26:10PM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 03/04/2011 02:00 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> >> === Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
> >> There is a huge demand (see
> >> [[http
On 04/03/11 at 14:26 +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 03/04/2011 02:00 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> >> === Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
> >> There is a huge demand (see
> >> [[http://bugs.debian
On 03/04/2011 02:00 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
>> === Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
>> There is a huge demand (see
>> [[http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=548917|#548917]])
>> for usi
On 04/03/11 at 14:00 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> > === Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
> > There is a huge demand (see
> > [[http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=548917|#548917]])
> >
Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 11:16 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> === Use alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations ===
> There is a huge demand (see
> [[http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=548917|#548917]])
> for using alternatives to switch between Ruby implementations
Philipp Kern writes:
> On 2011-03-04, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>>=== Generation of ri and rdoc documentation ===
>>
>> We decide not to generate the ri and rdoc documentation, as there are
>> good online services providing it (like rdoc.info). We might change
>> our mind later. :)
>
> Are you s
On 2011-03-04, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>=== Generation of ri and rdoc documentation ===
>
> We decide not to generate the ri and rdoc documentation, as there are good
> online services providing it (like rdoc.info).
> We might change our mind later. :)
Are you sure about that? Not that I do mu
On 04/03/11 at 10:58 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Mar 04, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > Our plans are described on
> > http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/RubyInWheezy
> > Don't hesitate to ask for details if needed.
> Is this acceptable to the major Ruby developers or do they still hate
> you and
On Mar 04, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Our plans are described on
> http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/RubyInWheezy
> Don't hesitate to ask for details if needed.
Is this acceptable to the major Ruby developers or do they still hate
you and everybody else involved?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Des
Hi,
We are planning a rather large set of changes in Ruby packaging for
Debian wheezy, and would appreciate some external feedback on our
proposals.
Our plans are described on
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/RubyInWheezy
Don't hesitate to ask for details if needed.
- Lucas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
31 matches
Mail list logo
