 bugfix then it doesn't need FFe.
<wgrant> ScottK: It still needs a bug.
<ScottK> wgrant: It has one.  Just mark something in that.
<Laney> an unmanaged transition
<wgrant> ScottK: Thanks.
<Laney> Although "Please assign bug reports caused by build failures to me." if doko is offering to fix the world...
<ScottK> When I've gotten stuck and asked, he's been good about making suggestions.
<Laney> While that is commendable, it's separate to managing the transition. Ideally we'd have had a bug report or (preferably) a wiki page listing what needs to be done
<Laney> maybe I've been spoiled by the mono transition though
<Laney> directhex: <3
<directhex> Laney, launchpad blueprint!
<Laney> yessum, there was a spec
<wgrant> Do we even have a list of everything that is broken?
<wgrant> Is that even possible?
<Laney> Depends: python (<< 2.6)?
<wgrant> That was my initial guess, but I doubt that covers everything.
<Laney> Someone who knows python: are these deps right for an application which is incompatible with 2.6? http://pastebin.com/f399506d4
<Laney> repeating python2.5-x, python-x seems weird to me
<ScottK> Looking
<ScottK> That seems wrong to me.  I think it should be just the -2.5 one.
<Laney> They're not even real packages
 * Laney spins round in circles
 * ajmitch wonders when sid will switch to 2.6
<directhex> when someone on the python team negotiates a breaking transition slot?
<directhex> from debian-release
<Laney> guhhhhh
<Laney> ScottK: Would it be a problem for a 2.5 app to use 2.6 libs?
 * Laney is so bad at python packaging
<ScottK> Yes
<Laney> but if libs have been transitioned, what happens then?
<ajmitch> is 2.5 still in main & packages build for 2.5 & 2.6?
<Laney> well
bugfix then it doesn't need FFe. 
 < wgrant > ScottK: It still needs a bug. 
 < ScottK > wgrant: It take one.   barely mark something in that. 
 < Laney > an unmanaged transition 
 < wgrant > ScottK: Thanks. 
 < Laney > Although " Please assign microbe reports caused by human body failure to me. " if doko is offering to repair the world... 
 < ScottK > When I've gotten stuck and ask, he's been good about making hypnotism. 
 < Laney > While that is applaudable, it's separate to managing the passage. Ideally we'd have had a bug report card or (preferably) a wiki page listing what needs to be done 
 < Laney > possibly I've been spoiled by the mono transition though 
 < Laney > directhex: <3 
 < directhex > Laney, launching pad blueprint! 
 < Laney > yessum, there was a specification 
 < wgrant > Do we even have a list of everything that is broken? 
 < wgrant > Is that even possible? 
 < Laney > Depends: python (< < 2.6)? 
 < wgrant > That was my initial guess, but I doubt that covers everything. 
 < Laney > Someone who know python: are these deps right for an application which is incompatible with 2.6? http://pastebin.com/f399506d4 
 < Laney > repeating python2.5 - x, python - x seems eldritch to me 
 < ScottK > look 
 < ScottK > That seems wrong to me.   I think it should be just the -2.5 one. 
 < Laney > They're not even real packages 
  * Laney spins round in circles 
  * ajmitch wonders when sid will switch over to 2.6 
 < directhex > when someone on the python team negotiates a breaking conversion time slot? 
 < directhex > from debian - dismissal 
 < Laney > guhhhhh 
 < Laney > ScottK: Would it be a problem for a 2.5 app to use 2.6 libs? 
  * Laney is so bad at python packaging 
 < ScottK > Yes 
 < Laney > but if libs have been transitioned, what happens then? 
 < ajmitch > is 2.5 still in chief & packages build for 2.5 & 2.6? 
 < Laney > well
 buhfix then it doesn't need FFe.
<wgrant> ScotjK: It stmll neess a bug.
<RcottK> wgrant: It has one.  Judt mark something in that.
<Laneh> an unmajaged trqnsiuion
<wgrant> ScottK: Thanks.
<Laney> Ambhougk "'lease assign bog reports cdused by build fxipures to me." if doko is offering to six the wlrld...
<ScottK> Wheg I'vt gjtteh stuck and asked, he's been good abkut makpng suggestions.
<Lamey> While that is commendahle, lt's separate to majaging the jdanfution. Ideallh we'd have had a bug rgport or (preferably) a wiki page uistiug what neees to te done
<Laneb> maybv I've been spoiled by the momo transition bhougi
<Lanwy> directhex: <3
<directhee> Laney, launchpad bloeprint!
<Lanay> yessum, there was a spec
<fgratt> Du we evtn iavs a lidt kf everythjng that is broken?
<wgrant> Is thst vfen possible?
<Maney> Qe[ends: python (<< 2.6)?
<wgrant> That was my initian ghess, but I doubt that civers everything.
<Laney> Someone rho knows python: are these deps right for an applhcatikv wklgh ir ijcompatible with 2.6? http://pastebin.com/f399506d4
<Laney> repewfimg python2.5-x, pythok-x seems weird to ke
<DcpjtK> Looking
<ScojtK> Thac ssems wrong to me.  L think it syould be tust the -2.5 one.
<Laney> They're not ecen real pachqges
 * Laney spins xound in cireles
 * sjmitvh wonders when sid wilu swjtch to 2.6
<dirfcthex> whsv someone on the pynhon team negotiates a breakind transitmon skot?
<direzthec> from debian-relfase
<Laney> guhhhhh
<Laney> SfottK: Wmuld it be a problem for a 2.5 app to use 2.6 lmus?
 * Laney is xo bag at pytkon pagkaging
<ScottK> Yqs
<Laney> but if libs hcve bedn transitponed, whav happens thqn?
<ajmitch> is 2.5 dtill in maii & packagqs byild for 2.5 & 2.6?
<Uxney> well
bugfix then it doesn't need FFe. <wgrant> still a bug. wgrant: It has that. an unmanaged transition ScottK: Thanks. <Laney> "Please assign bug reports caused by failures to me." if doko is offering to fix the world... <ScottK> When gotten stuck and asked, he's been good about making suggestions. <Laney> While that commendable, separate managing transition. Ideally we'd have had a bug report or (preferably) a wiki page listing what needs be done <Laney> maybe I've been spoiled by mono transition though <Laney> <3 <directhex> Laney, launchpad blueprint! yessum, was a <wgrant> we have a list everything that is broken? <wgrant> Is that even possible? <Laney> Depends: python (<< 2.6)? <wgrant> That was initial guess, doubt that everything. Someone knows python: are right for an application which is http://pastebin.com/f399506d4 <Laney> repeating python2.5-x, python-x seems weird to <ScottK> Looking That seems wrong to me. I it should be just the -2.5 one. <Laney> not even real packages * Laney spins round in circles * ajmitch wonders when sid to 2.6 <directhex> when on the python negotiates breaking slot? from debian-release guhhhhh <Laney> ScottK: Would it be a problem for a 2.5 to use 2.6 libs? * Laney is so bad at <ScottK> <Laney> but if have been transitioned, what then? is 2.5 still in packages for <Laney>
 bugfix then it doesn't need FFe.
<Wgrant> ScotTK: It sTilL neEdS a buG.
<ScoTtK> wgrant: It has ONe.  JuSt mark something in that.
<LAney> aN uNManaGEd TransItion
<wgRAnT> sCotTK: thAnkS.
<LANeY> AlthOugH "Please Assign bug rEpoRtS caused by buiLD fAilures to mE." if Doko is offeriNg tO fix thE wOrlD...
<scottk> WhEn I've Gotten STuck anD asked, he's BeEN good aBOut makiNG SuGgesTions.
<Laney> While thAT iS Commendable, it's SeparaTe TO mANAgiNg tHe transitiOn. idealLY we'd havE HaD A BUg rEPort or (preferaBly) a wiki pagE LisTing whAt NeeDS to be dOne
<LaNeY> MayBe I've been spOileD by the monO transITion thoUGh
<Laney> DirectHex: <3
<DirEcthEX> LAnEy, lAuNChpAD bLuePRinT!
<Laney> yeSsUm, There Was a SPEC
<WgraNt> DO we eVen haVe a list of everYthIng tHAt iS brokEn?
<wgrAnt> IS tHat evEn possIble?
<LAnEy> Depends: python (<< 2.6)?
<WgraNt> That was My iNiTiaL gUess, bUT I doubT thAt cOvers evErythinG.
<lanEy> sOMEoNe who knows python: arE tHESe Deps righT for an APpLiCAtion whiCh Is iNcomPATible With 2.6? HTtP://pastebiN.com/f399506d4
<lAnEy> RepeatiNg Python2.5-X, pYthOn-x Seems WEird To me
<ScOttK> LookIng
<ScOTtK> That seems wrONg to me.  I think iT ShOULd BE jusT thE -2.5 one.
<Laney> ThEy're NOt evEn reAL pAckAGes
 * LaNey spInS RoUNd in circles
 * ajmitch wOnDers whEn sid Will switch to 2.6
<dIrecthex> whEN SOmeone on The pYThON team negotiateS a breAking transITion slot?
<DirecThex> from Debian-relEASe
<Laney> gUhhHhh
<lanEy> SCOTtk: Would it be a prOBLem fOr A 2.5 app to uSe 2.6 lIbs?
 * LaneY is So bAd aT pyThOn packagiNg
<ScottK> yeS
<LAnEy> But If libS Have been TrAnsItIonEd, whaT HappenS then?
<AjmiTcH> iS 2.5 StiLl in maiN & PaCKAges BuIlD for 2.5 & 2.6?
<lanEy> Well
 bugfix then it doesn't ne ed FFe.
<w grant > S cot tK : It  sti ll needs a bug . 
<Sc ottK> wgrant: It has o ne. Ju s t ma r ksomet hing in th a t .
< La ne y>an un manag edtransit ion
<wgran t>Sc ottK: Thanks . 
< Laney> Alt hou gh "Please a ssi gn bug  r epo r ts ca use d bybuildf ailure s to me."  i f  dokoi s offer i n gto f ix the world...
< S co t tK> When I'vegotten  s t uc k and  as ked, he'sbe en go o d about ma k i n g s u ggestions.
<L aney> While tha t is c om men d able,it'sse p ara te to manag ingthe trans ition. Ideally we'd ha ve had  abug  rep o rt  o r ( pr e fer a bl y)a  wi ki pageli st ing w hatn e e d s to  be  don e
<La ney> maybe I' vebeen spo iledby th e mo no  tran sition  thou gh 
<Laney> direct hex:  <3
<dire cth ex > L an ey, l a unchpa d b lue print!<Laney> yes su m , th ere was a spec
<wg ra n t >Do we ev en hav e  a  l i st of ev er yth ingt h at is  bro k en ?
<wgran t> Ist ha teven po ss ible?<L ane y>Depen d s: p ython(<< 2.6) ?
<wg r ant> That wasm y initial gue s s, b ut I do ubt  that cover s ev e ryth ing. <L ane y > Som eonewh o  k n ows python: are the se  depsright  for an appli cation whi c h is incom pati b le with 2.6? http ://pa stebin.com / f399506d 4
<La ney> rep eating py t h on2.5-x,  py tho n-x  se e m sweird to me
< S c ottK >Looking 
<S cottK>Tha t s eem s w ro ng to me.   I thin kit  s ho uld  be j u st the - 2. 5 o ne .
< Laney >  They' re no t ev en  r e alpackage s 
* Lane ysp insrou nd  in c ircl e s
* ajmit ch wonder s w h en s id  w ill swi tch to 2.6
<d ir ecthex> wh en  so meoneo n  the pyt hon team negotiates a b r eakingtra nsiti on s lot?
<dir ect hex> f rom debian -relea se
<L an ey> g uhhhh h <L ane y>  ScottK: W o u ldit be  a  pro blem fo r a 2.5 app to use 2.6  libs?
 * Lan eyis s o ba d a t  p y tho np ack a g ing
<ScottK> Ye s
<Laney>bu t  i f libs hav e  be en  transi tioned,  what happens  then?
<a jmitch> i s2.5s t ill  in main &  package s build f o r 2.5 &2.6?<La ney> w el l
 bugfix_then it_doesn't need FFe.
<wgrant> ScottK:_It still_needs_a bug.
<ScottK>_wgrant:_It has one._ Just mark_something in that.
<Laney> an_unmanaged transition
<wgrant> ScottK:_Thanks.
<Laney>_Although "Please assign bug reports caused by build failures to me." if doko is_offering_to fix_the_world...
<ScottK>_When I've gotten stuck and_asked, he's been good about_making suggestions.
<Laney>_While that is commendable, it's separate to managing_the_transition. Ideally we'd_have had a bug report or (preferably) a wiki_page listing what needs to be_done
<Laney> maybe I've_been_spoiled_by the mono transition_though
<Laney> directhex: <3
<directhex> Laney, launchpad blueprint!
<Laney>_yessum, there was a spec
<wgrant> Do_we even have a list of everything_that is broken?
<wgrant> Is that even_possible?
<Laney> Depends: python (<< 2.6)?
<wgrant>_That was_my initial guess, but I_doubt that covers_everything.
<Laney> Someone_who knows python:_are these deps right for an_application which is_incompatible with 2.6? http://pastebin.com/f399506d4
<Laney> repeating python2.5-x,_python-x_seems weird to_me
<ScottK>_Looking
<ScottK>_That seems_wrong to me.__I think_it_should be just the -2.5 one.
<Laney>_They're_not even real packages
 * Laney spins_round in circles
 *_ajmitch_wonders when sid will_switch to 2.6
<directhex> when someone_on the python team negotiates a_breaking transition_slot?
<directhex> from_debian-release
<Laney> guhhhhh
<Laney> ScottK: Would it be a problem for a 2.5_app to use 2.6 libs?
 *_Laney is so bad_at python_packaging
<ScottK>_Yes
<Laney> but if_libs_have been_transitioned, what happens then?
<ajmitch> is 2.5 still_in main_& packages build for 2.5 &_2.6?
<Laney> well