From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Sun, 03 Jan 2016 21:50:02 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] python-can: bump to 1.4.1 In-Reply-To: <20160102233127.0c6f078c@free-electrons.com> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Sat, 2 Jan 2016 23:31:27 +0100") References: <1451686709-25501-1-git-send-email-yegorslists@googlemail.com> <20160101222835.GD2182@free.fr> <20160102233127.0c6f078c@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <87fuyeo0at.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: > Yann, all, > On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 23:28:35 +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >> I think we want to use upstream locations as much as possible, and only >> fallback to alternative locations when there is no upstream, or upstream >> is flaky. > For Python packages, I actually find it quite practical when PyPi is > used. Indeed, instead of having dozens of weird upstream locations and > release behavior, you have one consistent way of fetching Python > modules. It also makes it easier when reviewing new packages, when > looking at package bumps, since you know what to expect from PyPi. > So I wouldn't be as strict as you said in terms of not using PyPi. I agree. I also find it "nice" to use pypi if we can (E.G. if we are using a release). -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard