The state of packages based on Python ports

[Paul Hoffman]

On Jan 31, 2012, at 9:18 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 05:37:54PM -0800, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> ftp.freebsd.org: /pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All
> 
> We don't update ports in the *-release directories once the release
> has been cut.  

Thanks, that makes good sense. 

> Our recommendation is that you should always keep your
> ports tree up-to-date, and download packages from e.g. package-8-stable/.

Combined with Wen's message yesterday about the official version moving to 2.7 after 8.2 was cut, that makes sense.

HOWEVER, it doesn't answer the question of packages for 3.x. Is the policy "there can be (mostly) only one set of packages for Python modules, and that is for the preferred version"? Why not also have "py30-foo" and so on?

I have a specific need for a project I am working on (which uses Python 3.1), and now have to jump through major hoops of adding the whole ports tree just to get two minor Python ports; everything else is coming from packages.

--Paul Hoffman