Hi Emanuel,
Thanks for the prompt reply! On 18 February 2025 at 18:18, Emmanuel Arias wrote: | Hi! | On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 01:54:19PM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > Hi all, | > | > I have long maintained rpy2 (and rpy before) which provides a bridge from | > Python to R (which I tend to care more for), and am on friendly terms with | > its author. You can see my repo at salsa [1], it is pretty vanilla. | > | > The upcoming upstream release will split into three packages, all in the same | > source repo [2]. I am a casual Python user, and not all into packaging there | > (source or for Debian). But I can wondering that this arrangement must exist | > elsewhere. Is there a good pattern I can borrow to build (and then install ?) | > rpy2-interfaces to then build (and install ?) rpy2-objects to then build | > rpy2? | > | Seems very similar to basemap[0] | | [0] https://sources.debian.org/src/basemap/1.4.1-1/ I may have been unclear in what I was looking for. If I read this correctly, then it "bends" the upstreeam layout to effectively undo the package split? I was thinking more along the lines of 'how do I create three binary Python packages that are interdependent from one source repo'. Is that doable? Dirk | > Python users see these as independent as they are in three different PyPI | > packages. | > | > Is there a best or recommended way to approach this? CCs welcome, I am not | > subscribed to debian-python. | > | > Cheers, Dirk | > | > | > [1] https://salsa.debian.org/edd/rpy2 | > [2] https://github.com/rpy2/rpy2 | > -- | > dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | | -- | cheers, | Emmanuel Arias | | ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ | ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ eam...@debian.org | ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: 13796755BBC72BB8ABE2AEB5 FA9DEC5DE11C63F1 | ⠈⠳⣄ | x[DELETED ATTACHMENT signature.asc, application/pgp-signature] -- dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
