Request to allow an incompatible upgrade
a.badger at gmail.com
Wed Aug 15 22:52:28 UTC 2012
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 03:53:32PM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 15 August 2012 15:31, BJ Dierkes <derks at bjdierkes.com> wrote:
> > I could do that, but it would mean one of two things right?
> > a) python-cement2 Conflicts with python-cement
> We usually go for this unless the module can be dual installed.
All python modules can be dual installed. However, it may require changes
to other packages to make use of. We utilize setuptools to install the
package as a multiple version (setuptools installs it into an alternate
path) and then packages that need the non-default version have to add it to
their path somehow. There is a setuptools provided way to do that too:
__requires__ = ['cement >= 2.0']
In EPEL we're carrying a few of these packages for web frameworks since the
versions that shipped with RHEL are old or different web frameworks require
Also note -- Conflicts aren't allowed in fedora packages except under some
very specific circumsances. I don't think EPEL has a divergence here.
Also note -- personally I wouldn't mind this or several other packages being
free to upgrade. But then agian, I'm not personally a consumer of an old
version of them :-)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the epel-devel-list