On 12/28/2013 01:00 AM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > OK, I'm sorry. > > What does it mean a "clean backport" vs other type of backports? > dh-python is in backports, so no changes are required to backport > packages build-depending on dh-python. Is that not clean enough?
I think you somehow misunderstood me. Let me try to expand in a longer message then. python3 depends on dh-python. As much as I can see, that's the only package with a direct dependency on dh-python. Therefore, for Jessie, it is perfectly valid to omit dh-python in build-depends, as long as your package build-depends on python3. However, if we want to backport a package to Wheezy, and that package is using pybuild, then it needs an explicit build-depends on dh-python, because in Wheezy, there's no dh-python, and python3 doesn't depend on it. Therefore, to facilitate backports to Wheezy, I think it is nice to just leave the dh-python as explicit dependency in new packages, at least for until we have released Jessie. What I called "clean backports" was just a backport to Wheezy with unmodified source package (just a rebuild without modification). I think it is a good thing to make it possible for ourselves to do easy backports this way. It is also a good thing to make it possible for our users to backport packages to Wheezy themselves without too much hassle, even if the package isn't officially in backports. So, yes, we don't explicitly need dh-python for Jessie if we have python3 as build-depends, but IMO it is nice to do so. On 12/27/2013 11:18 PM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > I don't understand why are you insisting on blocking migrations to > dh-python. Is there some non-Debian requirement that you are omitting > / not-telling here? I absolutely don't want to block any migration to dh-python. Quite the opposite, I think it's great that we don't have to manually do stuff to support python3, and I am very happy that this part has been automated by pybuild. I do not know enough pybuild (which is very new, so I think that's normal), but working on a few package maintained by Piotr, I like what I saw about it. Packages supporting both Python 2.x and Python 3 have a very short debian/rules, which is a very good thing. As for the "omitting / not-telling" part here, I'm not sure what you are referring to. Maybe the fact that I do maintain unofficial backports of a lot of python modules in order to have OpenStack to work in Wheezy? Well, if that's what you are thinking about, my opinion is that it is a good thing if someone cares about doing easy backports, and even do some work in Sid to make them more easy. I would love to make this happen through the official backports of Debian, however because of the amount of packages, and the difficulty to have them all migrated to testing, I don't think this is technically possible in good conditions. Like many others, I am hoping for the Debian PPAMAIN repositories to be available to start doing that. That's the only way, or we'd have to change the backports policy, which I don't see happening anytime soon. Thoughts on this would be very much welcome! Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52be6f61.1010...@debian.org
