Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #16839

Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP?

Path	csiph.com!pasdenom.info!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!news.samoylyk.net!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Jakob Haufe <sur5r@debian.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.maint.python
Subject	Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP?
Date	Sat, 05 Apr 2025 15:20:01 +0200
Message-ID	<KybBf-biam-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<Kxpdg-aJMn-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <Ky7nX-bf79-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Mailbox-Line	From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Sat Apr 5 13:15:55 2025
Old-Return-Path	<SRS0=PiB0=WX=debian.org=sur5r@norsu.hel.sur5r.net>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status	No, score=-14.299 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Policyd-Weight	using cached result; rate:hard: -4.6
X-Greylist	delayed 476 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at bendel; Sat, 05 Apr 2025 13:15:37 UTC
Organization	Debian
X-Mailer	Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.49; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/boDy7ejcj1HnZu_z1qiqoFz"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Mailing-List	<debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/22959
List-ID	<debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL	<https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive	https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20250405150705.13b5b85f@tizio.sur5r.net
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	44
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Cc	debian-python@lists.debian.org, fladi@debian.org
X-Original-Date	Sat, 5 Apr 2025 15:07:05 +0200
X-Original-Message-ID	<20250405150705.13b5b85f@tizio.sur5r.net>
X-Original-References	<20250403112529.53f2b4d7@beer> <687ec59b-129e-408a-b985-4293167818f9@fladi.at>
Xref	csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:16839

Show key headers only | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 10:12:42 +0200
Michael Fladischer <michael@fladi.at> wrote:

> Am 03.04.2025 um 11:25 schrieb Jakob Haufe:
> > 2. Package django-fsm-2 as src:django-fsm-2 and add Conflicts:
> >     python3-django-fsm to it, so they won't be co-installed.
> 
> I would also prefer this option as I was planning to RM 
> django-fsm(-admin) due to lack of upstream activity.

Thanks, will ITP then. Would you like to be added to Uploaders?

Cheers,
sur5r

-- 
ceterum censeo microsoftem esse delendam.

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP? Jakob Haufe <sur5r@debian.org> - 2025-04-03 11:40 +0200
  Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP? Michael Fladischer <michael@fladi.at> - 2025-04-05 10:50 +0200
    Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP? Jakob Haufe <sur5r@debian.org> - 2025-04-05 15:20 +0200
      Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP? Michael Fladischer <michael@fladi.at> - 2025-04-05 17:40 +0200

csiph-web