Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 21:56:27 -0400 From: Tim Middleton <x@Vex.Net> To: python@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Deprecation of lang/python{15,20} Message-ID: <200404252156.27807.x@Vex.Net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0404251814270.679-100000@pancho> References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0404251814270.679-100000@pancho>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bah, i shouldn't post this. But it's sunday night, and i'm avoiding toing other work i should have done for monday morning... and this list needs more posts... so what the heck... Just understand that I'm mostly playing devil's advocate (ie. wasting your time) below... <-; On Sunday 25 April 2004 19:18, Mark Linimon wrote: > 1. User confusion: what's the "right" version? It also clutters up > the port list web page. Not much less confusion with 21 and 22 still there. Most poeple would figure out "ports/python" as the default I think; and those that wouldn't would likely take the highest number I'd think. Or just do a binary install from sysinstall. Or pick up the "right" version as the default dependancy from whatever python-needing port they are wanting to build. > 2. Build resources: bento.FreeBSD.org continuously builds all packages > both as a QA step, and to make them available to users who choose not This, and just general 'cleanliness', of the ports on principle are the best arguments for the removal, I think. Give bento a break; a worthy cause. Active moves should be made to get rid of 2.1 and 2.2 as well as soon as possible on this principle. (Yeah, i know, it was suggested 2.1 is possibly of interest for compatibility with debian woody, old redhat, etc... perhaps... though not a goal i personally aspire to!) > 3. Download time: currently, anyone who wants to track the ports > collection needs to download the entire tarball or track the CVS files > (IMHO, this is a bug, but ...) In any case, the download time and I agree; the ports tree is very, very big... and painfully long to extract. I doubt removing two ports is going ot help all that much though. And while the principle of cleanliness above might be used here, there's not all that many ports in the position that python is in of having multiple simultaneously active versions. (I'm a fan of misc/porteasy to solve this problem... lets me maintain a tree of more-or-less just the ports i use, updated via CVS fairly easily... has occassional problems, but mostly works... especially if hacked to use an anoncvs mirror... porteasy -a -u -I) That being said, I have to maintain one old box with a fairly large python app on it which is restricted to Python 2.0 (the app isn't; just this box is!), and I'm not allowed to upgrade it. Perhaps i'm just bitter and want to share the multi-version misery. <-; (Unfortunately the box is not a FreeBSD box, so removing 2.0 from ports won't bother the owners...) Okay, i'm done wasting everyone's time now. Delete away. I'll only be slightly sad to see 1.5 go... just for purely nostalgic reasons... it was the first version of Python to truly enlighten my programming path.... bon voyage Python 1.5 port, rest in peace. -- Tim Middleton | Cain Gang Ltd | There are a thousand hacking at the branches x@veX.net | www.Vex.Net | of evil [but who] at the root. --Thoreau (W)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200404252156.27807.x>