From lmacken at redhat.com Tue Sep 1 13:28:54 2009 From: lmacken at redhat.com (Luke Macken) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 09:28:54 -0400 Subject: python 2.5 or 2.6 In-Reply-To: References: <3055c0a0908201354y35767cf6x8bd23f334b534832@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090901132854.GA26911@x300.bos.redhat.com> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 05:04:28PM -0700, Kyle VanderBeek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Martin-Louis Bright wrote: > > > Hi! > > Does anyone know if/when python 2.5 or 2.6 will be included in RHEL? python > > 2.4 is certainly solid, but I'm trying to run fabric and it requires at > > least 2.5 > > > > In general, you're not going to see that major of an upgrade in RHEL. Every > python related package would have to be upgraded at the same time, and > that'd go against RHEL's stability goals. > > I'd encourage you to lean on the fabric folks to support 2.4 (which is > really quite easy for the most part, other than the new try/except/finally > that showed up in 2.5). The thing that bites me the most in Python 2.4 is the datetime module. Since Python2.4's datetime module doesn't have a strptime method, like: datetime.strptime('06-09-2009', '%m-%d-%Y') I end up having to do something like: datetime(*time.strptime('06-09-2009', '%m-%d-%Y')[:-2]) luke From smccarty at eyemg.com Thu Sep 17 17:07:33 2009 From: smccarty at eyemg.com (Scott McCarty) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:07:33 -0400 Subject: New pacage, not sure where to start, or pehaps I have started but don't know where to end Message-ID: <200909171307.33874.smccarty@eyemg.com> All, I am working on distributing a log analysis utility wrote called petit (http://opensource.eyemg.com/index.php/Petit). Currently, I am treating it more like a regular application than a python module because it comes with several/many data files that make it work correctly. I created a make file, for my sanity, to help in creating RPMs and DEBs. Since my package is not in Fedora or Debian, etc, it makes it difficult for me to use/build without having the make file. I then build RPMs and distribute them to all of my RHEL5 servers, but it works on my Fedora desktop too. The problem is, I have detected that this is not standard for Fedora packages. I am torn on what the right vs. practical way of handling the packaging is and I would like to make it compatible with Fedora so that it could eventually be distributed. I have read through the Fedora packaging guidelines for Python and understand the basic concepts, but I am not sure if I should even distribute this as a python module. Perhaps, in a perfect world, I would have my Makefile/build tools to create up to date RPMs/Debs, and it might also make a distutils version for Fedora & Debian packagers? I am looking for some advise/thoughts if any body has time. Thanks in advance, I really appreciate any help. Scott M -- Scott McCarty EYEMG.com LLC - Interactive Media Group 190 North Union St. Akron, Oh 44304 Office: 330-434-7873 ext 214 From a.badger at gmail.com Thu Sep 17 17:47:54 2009 From: a.badger at gmail.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:47:54 -0700 Subject: New pacage, not sure where to start, or pehaps I have started but don't know where to end In-Reply-To: <200909171307.33874.smccarty@eyemg.com> References: <200909171307.33874.smccarty@eyemg.com> Message-ID: <4AB2764A.2040405@gmail.com> On 09/17/2009 10:07 AM, Scott McCarty wrote: > All, > I am working on distributing a log analysis utility wrote called petit > (http://opensource.eyemg.com/index.php/Petit). Currently, I am treating it > more like a regular application than a python module because it comes with > several/many data files that make it work correctly. > > I created a make file, for my sanity, to help in creating RPMs and DEBs. Since > my package is not in Fedora or Debian, etc, it makes it difficult for me to > use/build without having the make file. I then build RPMs and distribute them > to all of my RHEL5 servers, but it works on my Fedora desktop too. The problem > is, I have detected that this is not standard for Fedora packages. > > I am torn on what the right vs. practical way of handling the packaging is and > I would like to make it compatible with Fedora so that it could eventually be > distributed. I have read through the Fedora packaging guidelines for Python > and understand the basic concepts, but I am not sure if I should even > distribute this as a python module. Perhaps, in a perfect world, I would have > my Makefile/build tools to create up to date RPMs/Debs, and it might also make > a distutils version for Fedora & Debian packagers? > > I am looking for some advise/thoughts if any body has time. > It's fine to be more like an application than a module. rpmlint is an example of an application that doesn't create a module. -Toshi -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: