Request to allow an incompatible upgrade

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at
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> 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']
import pkg_resources

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
different versions.

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
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the epel-devel-list mailing list