brainstorming for UDS-N - Package Selection and Defaults

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:27:57AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 03:10:20PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > On 04.10.2010 02:30, Robert Collins wrote:
> > > It would be really nice, as a 'runs unpackaged stuff on the distro'
> > > use case, to support the highest python version on one LTS as a
> > > non-default on the next LTS, consistently.

> > No. why ship 2.6 with the next LTS? Why keep ~20MB on each CD which is not used? 

> "support" does not imply "include on the CD image".  The point would be to
> make sure that it is available and usable by the people who rely on it.

The problem here is that our python handling has been entirely designed
around the idea that each python extension should be packaged as a single
python-foo binary package containing support for all supported python
versions.  So "support" does imply that the binaries for any extensions we
wish to include in that support, and which are also needed on the CD,
*will* be included on the CD image, at a fairly significant disk space cost.

Unless we go back to the drawing board on how we want python packaging to
work, which I think would be unadvisable while we still haven't gotten a
clear consensus in the Debian Python community around the previous
iteration.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20101026/a437c8f3/attachment-0001.pgp