From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tommi Virtanen Subject: ceph rados.py packaging help Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 10:50:55 -0700 Message-ID: <20110606175055.GA2569@dreamer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail.hq.newdream.net ([66.33.206.127]:39819 "EHLO mail.hq.newdream.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753635Ab1FFRuz (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2011 13:50:55 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Laszlo Boszormenyi Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org Hi Laszlo! (And hi Cc'ed ceph-dev.) As you probably know, the Ceph project tries to provide debs for Debian lenny, squeeze and sid, and Ubuntu lucid, maverick and natty. We're starting to add Python bindings to libceph, librados etc, and ran into a case where not 100% sure how to handle. That is, how should we package e.g. rados.py so that the packaging works across as many releases as we can? There is the Debian Python Policy, but that usually only documents the current best behavior; how do we target more than squeeze/sid? http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ e.g. should we use python-central, python-support, put the files ourselves into /usr/lib/pythonX.Y/dist-packages (or site-packages, for <2.6), or what? (I heard Sage was perhaps willing to drop some of the oldest releases, if this proves insurmountable to do with just one style of packaging. Our internal needs may dictate that we must support some older versions, but I think those setups are going to need a virtualenv anyway, soon..) Any guidance you can provide would be very welcome. Thanks! -- :(){ :|:&};: