On 04/03/2011 06:53 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > > Oxan, thanks for the quick response.
Thanks for your response! > I opened this issue upstream: > > https://github.com/Yelp/python-gearman/issues/#issue/11 > > I think the way to go is to drop __init__.py from > python-gearman.libgearman, and make it depend on python-gearman, since > it is a sub-module of the gearman namespace. That does make sense. > > I haven't been able to make gearman.libgearman work properly without > the __path__ changes, though I'm not entirely sure why as I'm sort of a > python extension novice. If anyone *can* make that work, then we don't > even need the change suggested above. I did some more testing and got it working without __init__.py. The __init__.py is only needed during compilation/installation and not during execution. This does make sense, as it adds a directory to the path that is already searched in. Not installing it in debian/rules should be enough, can you confirm that? I also think that we can demote the dependency to a Recommends, as they do work without each other. > >> I think the best we can do at this point is A, given the side-effects of the >> other options. I'll implement that in python-gearman (which should be enough) >> if nobody objects. > > Yeah I was thinking of doing the same in the python-gearman.libgearman, > but I think since its temporary we can just leave it in python-gearman > until the necessary changes can be made for python-gearman.libgearman > to depend on python-gearman. > > With the Conflicts on one side, I think we can close this bug, and open > a new wishlist bug to implement the dependency relationship. Given your response and the results above I'm hoping that we can fix this directly in one upload, without having to upload a temporary fix first :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
