Open Stack

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:36:52AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 02/27/2013 05:54 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >>
> >>You know, pinning should only ever be a short-term solution. At some
> >>point, distributions are going to have the newer version of any given
> >>package and we need to be able to work with that.
> >>
> >>Really, any time we pin to a specific dependency version we should also
> >>file a bug to track the work needed to unpin it again.
> >
> >And the tools/pip-requires file should have a comment linking to that
> >bug, or otherwise clearly explaining why the version pin was required,
> >so that we don't have to go hunting for the reason.
> >
> >
> >Daniel
> >
> 
> This is a situation that's going to get worse before it gets better.
> With python 3 being incompatible, and pypi packages now starting to
> release that don't support python 2, and pip apparently not caring
> about python version compatibility, this is going to just end up
> ugly if we leave things open.

This seriously needs to be fixed in pip as a matter of priority. It
should absolutely have a way to tell it you require packages that
are compatible with python2 so it doesn't randomly decide to give
you python3 stuff for your python2 app. This current behaviour makes
it pretty much useless for the role we're asking it to fill.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|