This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Python packages by maintainer
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Cc: Jari Aalto <jari dot aalto at cante dot net>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 14:00:29 +0200
- Subject: Re: Python packages by maintainer
- References: <4B5EADFB.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20100126135611.GA2212@tishler.net> <4B5F54D1.email@example.com> <20100427220143.GC3692@tishler.net> <4BDB08A2.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20100430170340.GL5596@tishler.net> <4BF10457.email@example.com> <4C0564B1.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20100613010916.GA1416@tishler.net> <1276489838.5424.20.camel@YAAKOV04>
- Reply-to: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
On Jun 13 23:30, Yaakov S wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 21:09 -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
> > Well, it's more "about" than "on," but I'm ready to release Python
> > 2.6.5-2 and promote it to current.
> > However, AFAICT, most of the above packages have not been rebuilt
> > against Python 2.6.5-1. Should I release and promote Python 2.6.5-2
> > anyways? Or, should I wait for more of the above to be updated first?
> Personally, my packages (both distro and Ports) are ready to go, and I'm
> getting tired of being in limbo. OTOH, things will break if we switch
> before everything else is ready.
> I'm most concerned about Jari's packages. bzr and mercurial are pretty
> important, and python-crypto, python-feedparser, and python-paramiko are
> dependencies of other packages. Unfortunately, the last we heard from
> him on this was not encouraging.
Which is 10 days ago, unfortunately. Can nobody help him to fix this
> I think we need some guidance from cgf and Corinna on this one: at what
> point can we say that a package has been orphaned, at least to the point
> that we can do a one-time NMU in order to not break the distro, if not
> an outright adoption?
Jari is responsive, even though not quite as responsive as I'd expect
from a package maintainer, especially on the base cygwin mailing list.
I don't think it's a good idea to define a package as orphaned as long
as the maintainer replies to mail and still uploads new packages. That
sets a bad precedent. What about working with Jari to fix the issue
instead, and what about you, Jari, to be somewhat more responsive? Did
you try to debug this issue? Is there maybe just some DLL missing or
the permissions of the DLL are wrong?
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com