Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: "W. Martin Borgert" Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: on keep providing python 2 packages Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:20:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Fri Aug 19 10:10:34 2016 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.7 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: DYN_NJABL=SKIP(0) NOT_IN_SBL_XBL_SPAMHAUS=-1.5 BL_NJABL=SKIP(-1.5) CL_IP_EQ_HELO_IP=-2 (check from: .debian. - helo: .einhorn.in-berlin. - helo-domain: .in-berlin.) FROM/MX_MATCHES_NOT_HELO(DOMAIN)=0; rate: -5 Old-X-Envelope-From: debacle@debian.org Old-X-Envelope-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-07-23) X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/14132 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20160819101012.wteg7bryh5hzcluh@fama Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 5 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:10:12 +0200 X-Original-Message-ID: <20160819101012.wteg7bryh5hzcluh@fama> X-Original-References: Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:8792 On 2016-08-19 08:19, Sandro Tosi wrote: > does anyone else agrees with this view? should we clarify that, when > available, python2 modules must be provided (along with their py3k)? Yes.