* knitti wrote:
> On 11/12/07, Marc Balmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If I can't get an OK for this or if there is no better proposal (just
> > saying this is not nice is not an alternative, imo ;) then I will have
> > to move Zope and friends to an internal CVS. That would leave Zope in
> > O
On 11/12/07, Marc Balmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I can't get an OK for this or if there is no better proposal (just
> saying this is not nice is not an alternative, imo ;) then I will have
> to move Zope and friends to an internal CVS. That would leave Zope in
> OpenBSD unmaintained (and u
Okay, I've had time to look at it.
Yeah, the conflict stuff is subtly wrong. There are gremlins in there.
You will have to wait until it's fixed, because it's not really easy
to do without breaking anything else...
* Ingo Schwarze [2007-11-13]:
> Consistent naming schemes are nice to have.
Yes, but we don't have a consistent base to start with...
> On the other hand, regarding FLAVORS, aren't they intended for
> packages having common basic technology (which is not the case here as
> we are using different
> NetBSD apparently uses the latter, using py23-, py24- etc.
This proposal reminds me of p5-* and php5-*.
Consistent naming schemes are nice to have.
On the other hand, regarding FLAVORS, aren't they intended for packages
having common basic technology (which is not the case here as we ar
Joerg Zinke wrote:
[...]
Python can co-exist in different versions at the same time. Why
should that not be possible for site-packages with our ports tree?
ACK, would be nice to be able install ports for different python
versions.
Maybe this issue could be solved by improving python.port.m
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:38:28 +0100
Marc Winiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marc Balmer wrote:
> > Everyone interested in Zope (and Plone), please take a look at
> > this. I am totally open for better solutions.
>
> IMO everyone using python should be interessted. Why is python
> maintained in
Nikolay Sturm wrote:
* Marc Winiger [2007-11-12]:
Python can co-exist in different versions at the same time. Why should
that not be possible for site-packages with our ports tree?
Which is exactly the question Espie has to answer, but is currently too
busy to do. So why don't we all just wai
* Marc Winiger [2007-11-12]:
> Python can co-exist in different versions at the same time. Why should
> that not be possible for site-packages with our ports tree?
Which is exactly the question Espie has to answer, but is currently too
busy to do. So why don't we all just wait and maybe poke a lit
On 11/12/07, Marc Balmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I can't get an OK for this or if there is no better proposal (just
> saying this is not nice is not an alternative, imo ;) then I will have
> to move Zope and friends to an internal CVS. That would leave Zope in
> OpenBSD unmaintained (and u
Marc Balmer wrote:
Everyone interested in Zope (and Plone), please take a look at this. I
am totally open for better solutions.
IMO everyone using python should be interessted. Why is python
maintained in different versions, while site-packages can only be used
with one version?
Python can
Marc Balmer wrote:
Python and Python ports have been changed to use 2.5 as the default
version. This brings Zope users into trouble:
Maybe I must use a bit more drastic verbiage: Zope is not usable
anymore. For database adapters like py-psycopg or ldap adapters like
zope-ldapuserfolder, n
Python and Python ports have been changed to use 2.5 as the default
version. This brings Zope users into trouble:
Zope still requires Python 2.4 to run. While it is no problem to
install Python 2.4 and Python 2.5 in parallel, some Python modules that
are needed by Zope only get built for Python
13 matches
Mail list logo
