----- Original Message -----
Pete Travis < me(a)petetravis.com > schrieb am Mon Jan 26 2015 at
> On 01/26/2015 08:53 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > Hi,
> > since bug #1126521 seems to be progressing nicely, I think it would be
> > nice to get in touch with python-sig, the maintainers of
> > python3-dateutil, about retiring python3-dateutil and adding a python3
> > subpackage to python-dateutil. They might want to do it the other way
> > around, which would be fine too, but either way, something should be
> > arranged.
> > I tried to sign up for the python-sig mailing list, but it is
> > "private" and I haven't received any welcome letter, so I think
> > stuck in some moderation queue.
> > Zbyszek
> Yes, I think it's a good time to bring up retiring
> I've also requested membership for that list, and included the list
> owners here, maybe they can expedite our requests.
As python-dateutil is not (yet) under the python-sig group
, you could reach the maintainers of python-dateutil under ther -owner
mail address (CC'ed).
python-sig(a)fp.o is for all group maintained package maintainers and general
python related questions are handled on python-devel(a)fp.o (also CC'ed).
(Sorry for the confusion, the python-sig groupmaintainership started very
recently and is still a work in process.)
I'd say it depends, how python3 will be introduced in F22, which
should provide the subpackage and the other one should be retired.
Maybe someone from  could comment on what they like to see in the future.
I don't mind having two separate packages until we approach F22 and the
future process is here.
Packaging Python extension modules should keep working the way it did up until F21.
python-dateutil will still be the Python2 build, python3-datetuil will still be the
Python3 build. There are some guidelines changes that I proposed for F22 , but I think
they don't influence dateutil.