On 2015-09-04 22:44, Diane Trout wrote: > I've made some limited progress trying to package Bokeh (BSD-3-Clause)
Many thanks for working this! > I managed to get the version 0.9.1 from pypi installable. (Though since it > was > my own experiments I didn't remove the jquery / bootstrap libraries.) Fortunately, Debian has now a current jQuery 1, again. And jQuery 3 in experimental. Thanks to Antonio Terceiro! Bootstrap is a recent version anyway. So it should be easy to just use Debians packages. > The most proper packaging would require grunt to be able to rebuild bokeh.js. > I was wondering if releasing the pypi version would be good enough. (The > package does at least contain a non-minimized version of bokeh.js) I'm not sure about this, but it looks like the Bokeh source is a huge directory of coffeescript files, while the resulting bokeh.js is not the source code. So build is: 1. coffee -> js 2. concat all js. Maybe its possible without grunt, just like Antonio did with jQuery? > Bokeh's unit tests also appear to depend on blaze, and that looks like that > has several missing dependencies. I would just leave out the tests for now. Bokeh is a huge beast even without them. Let's go step by step. > Thought It looks like the python-modules team is just > about to transition to git-dpm. Yes, that has been decided in Heidelberg, but I'm not sure about the current state. Who can comment on this? > Should I go ahead and submit abstract_rendering? Yes, but please fix the long description. It starts with "Abstract Rendering takes the opposite approach:" which confused me :~) > Should I work on getting > blaze submitted? If blaze is only needed for the tests, I suggest to postpone it. (What is blaze anyway?) Cheers
