[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0.
From: |
Leo Famulari |
Subject: |
bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0. |
Date: |
Mon, 29 May 2017 16:42:26 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.8.2 (2017-04-18) |
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 12:53:04AM +0530, Arun Isaac wrote:
> In general, for the typical python library/package (published both on
> pypi and github), should we prefer the pypi tarball or the original
> upstream github tarball? WDYT?
In my experience, it seems like the PyPi tarballs are what the upstream
projects want distributors to use.
However, as Marius pointed out, sometimes the upstream projects choose
not to distribute their tests on PyPi, and in that case I like to use
whichever release has tests, since the tests help us be sure that our
packaging works.
So, I usually use what's on PyPi, but it depends.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Alex Griffin, 2017/05/27
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Arun Isaac, 2017/05/28
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Leo Famulari, 2017/05/28
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Arun Isaac, 2017/05/28
- Message not available
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Leo Famulari, 2017/05/28
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Marius Bakke, 2017/05/28
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Arun Isaac, 2017/05/29
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Arun Isaac, 2017/05/29
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Arun Isaac, 2017/05/29
- Message not available
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0.,
Leo Famulari <=
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Arun Isaac, 2017/05/30
- Message not available
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Marius Bakke, 2017/05/30
- bug#27110: [PATCH] gnu: asciinema: Update to 1.4.0., Arun Isaac, 2017/05/30