The app-admin/bcfg2-0.9.6 final release is out :-) Reproducible: Always
Thanks for the release notification; assigning to maintainers.
Michael, Are you still interested in this package? I haven't seen you around forever.
(In reply to comment #2) > Michael, Are you still interested in this package? I haven't seen you around > forever. Yes, definitely interested! ...but juggling way too many balls, as usual. Also out of the country with virtually no net access for the past couple of weeks. Should probably ask this in irc, but what's the proecudure for handling version revs?
(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > Michael, Are you still interested in this package? I haven't seen you around > > forever. > > Yes, definitely interested! ...but juggling way too many balls, as usual. > Also out of the country with virtually no net access for the past couple of > weeks. No worries. > > Should probably ask this in irc, but what's the proecudure for handling version > revs? I don't understand. Make a new ebuild that works with the version bump and let me know about it ;) (Hint: most ebuilds you can just rename to get a new version)
> I don't understand. Make a new ebuild that works with the version bump and let > me know about it ;) (Hint: most ebuilds you can just rename to get a new > version) > The ebuild needs to be modified so that the lxml requirement is only there when using <=python2.4 or installing with the server use flag. Other than that, I think just the version bump should do it.
(In reply to comment #5) > > I don't understand. Make a new ebuild that works with the version bump and let > > me know about it ;) (Hint: most ebuilds you can just rename to get a new > > version) > > > > The ebuild needs to be modified so that the lxml requirement is only there when > using <=python2.4 or installing with the server use flag. Other than that, I > think just the version bump should do it. > Let's just get rid of python-2.4 and explicitly depend on >=python-2.5. Would that cause too many headaches?
> > Let's just get rid of python-2.4 and explicitly depend on >=python-2.5. Would > that cause too many headaches? > That's fine with me. I'll email Desai and have him comment here if it is.
(In reply to comment #4) > > Should probably ask this in irc, but what's the proecudure for handling version > > revs? > > I don't understand. Make a new ebuild that works with the version bump and let > me know about it ;) (Hint: most ebuilds you can just rename to get a new > version) Ah, sorry, my question wasn't clear. I know how to handle the ebuild, wasn't sure about what to do with it once it was made. I'll hold off until Desai answers the question about the Python dep, since using >=2.5 would make things a lot easier.
Just attach it here. Also, you should fix bug 232713 in the bump, I can help with that if needed.
Created attachment 176970 [details] new ebuild file for 0.9.6 Version bump. Also removed option of depending on python 2.4, which in turn allows removal of gamin and fam from the build-time dependencies.
Ok, well. I added the ebuild with some mods to a) fix that other bug and b) utilize the eclass better. Check it out when you get a chance. Thanks =)
