rejoindre l'équip e d'empaquetage python
Hi everyone I would be glad to join the python-modules packaging team. My alioth login is afayolle, and for those who dwell there, my irc nick is agurney. Thanks, -- Alexandre Fayolle LOGILAB, Paris (France) Formations Python, Zope, Plone, Debian: http://www.logilab.fr/formations Développement logiciel sur mesure: http://www.logilab.fr/services Informatique scientifique: http://www.logilab.fr/science signature.asc Description: Digital signature
joining the python-modules team
Apologies for the French subject line in the previous mail. I'm resending in case it caused it to be trapped by spam filters. I would be glad to join the python-modules packaging team. My alioth login is afayolle, and for those who dwell there, my irc nick is agurney. Thanks, -- Alexandre Fayolle LOGILAB, Paris (France) Formations Python, Zope, Plone, Debian: http://www.logilab.fr/formations Développement logiciel sur mesure: http://www.logilab.fr/services Informatique scientifique: http://www.logilab.fr/science signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: joining the python-modules team
Hi, On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Alexandre Fayolle wrote: > Apologies for the French subject line in the previous mail. I'm > resending in case it caused it to be trapped by spam filters. > > I would be glad to join the python-modules packaging team. Welcome to the group! You have been added and you will have commit rights tomorrow. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bugs have been filed, work can begin
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Here's a list of sources packages that need to be updated (266 packages): > http://people.debian.org/~hertzog/python/sources-by-maint Pierre Habouzit (Madcoder) did the mass-bug filing: http://bugs.debian.org/submitter:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugs.debian.org/usertag:debian-python@lists.debian.org And a wiki page to coordinate the NMUing: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianPython/BSP Everybody's help is welcome now! Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Coordinated effort to update python packages
Le Mar 13 Juin 2006 20:38, Raphael Hertzog a écrit : > For NMUers, always start by filling a bug report refering to this > announce, register the bug number and your intent to work on it in > the wiki page, do the work, send the patch to the BTS and upload the > package appropriately (using a DELAYED queue if needed). A mass bug filling occured, sorry for the few false positives I may have triggered, you can watch the list here : http://bugs.debian.org/from:[EMAIL PROTECTED] there is also a usertag [EMAIL PROTECTED], tag=policy: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=policy;[EMAIL PROTECTED] adding a ;pend-exc=done gives a good list of what the TODO is ;) Cheers, -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O[EMAIL PROTECTED] OOOhttp://www.madism.org pgpFXRFwUHgYp.pgp Description: PGP signature
request for NMUs [Was: Coordinated effort to update python packages]
Hello! [Tue, 13 Jun 2006] Raphael Hertzog wrote: > If you don't have time to do this now, please reply on > debian-python@lists.debian.org and allow us to make NMU of your packages. I wont have much time to fix my packages so please feel free to NMU any of them: > Robert Jordens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >gpib >libtunepimp >syck Thanks. Robert. -- Is your job running? You'd better go catch it! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New python distutils class
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Marc Dequènes wrote:
> They all are available in unstable now. You can find in my web directory
> 2 examples (soya and editobj), where, besides bugs in pysupport or
> pycentral, are well built using an updated version of the class :
> http://perso.duckcorp.org/duck/python-new-policy/
Here's a patch for the class, it used "python2.3" instead of "python" for
arch: all packages with pycentral.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
--- python-distutils-ng.mk.orig 2006-06-14 13:41:18.0 +0200
+++ python-distutils-ng.mk 2006-06-14 13:45:57.0 +0200
@@ -115,9 +115,15 @@
find $(DEB_DESTDIR)/$(cdbs_python_support_path) -type f -a -name "*.so"
-exec rm {} \;
find $(DEB_DESTDIR)/$(cdbs_python_support_path) -depth -type d -a
-empty -exec rmdir {} \;
else
+ifeq (all, $(cdbs_python_module_arch))
+common-install-arch common-install-indep:: python-install-py
+else
common-install-arch common-install-indep:: $(addprefix python-install-,
$(cdbs_python_build_versions))
python-install-%:
cd $(DEB_SRCDIR) && python$* $(DEB_PYTHON_SETUP_CMD) install
--root=$(DEB_DESTDIR) $(DEB_PYTHON_INSTALL_ARGS)
+endif # archall detection
+python-install-py:
+ cd $(DEB_SRCDIR) && python $(DEB_PYTHON_SETUP_CMD) install
--root=$(DEB_DESTDIR) $(DEB_PYTHON_INSTALL_ARGS)
endif # install selection
Re: Bugs have been filed, work can begin
Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >> Here's a list of sources packages that need to be updated (266 packages): >> http://people.debian.org/~hertzog/python/sources-by-maint > > Pierre Habouzit (Madcoder) did the mass-bug filing: > http://bugs.debian.org/submitter:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://bugs.debian.org/usertag:debian-python@lists.debian.org > > And a wiki page to coordinate the NMUing: > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianPython/BSP Do you know why my python applications do not have such bug ? There are mercurial and tailor (both of them depending on python2.4 and not python as 2.3 did not work). If my packages have not been caught by the mass-bug filing, others can have also been missed. As I am using cdbs, I will wait for a new cbds package before adapting and uploading these two packages. Best regards, Vincent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
question about the new policy
let's imagine we have that case: python-foo is a python module that uses and needs features from python2.X. python-bar uses python-foo but can work with all 2.* python version. Python-Versions will be: * >= 2.X for python-foo * all for python-bar how do we ensure that a user that has a python 2.Y installed, Y < X will not been able to install python-bar without also pulling python2.X ? Note that such a scheme can arise if a python-foo module decide to drop the support for a python release they consider ancient (like 2.3 nowadays). all the informations I got around for that problem were that it had to be manually tracked, which: * looks rather error prone ; * is computable since in that case, python-foo should not advertise its python2.Y support, but only >= 2.X. its Python-Version should be intesected avec the ones of its Depends, and only generate the relevant Provides. Reading the policy, it's unclear to me if arch:all package would have the python#.#- provides or if only arch:any will. if the former, then I fear computing the Depends: in the packages will become a real challenge and prevent bin-NMUS, not to mention uninstability problems, if the latter it will hide problems like the one above. Is there anything planned to address that ? -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O[EMAIL PROTECTED] OOOhttp://www.madism.org pgprv4GVGAVi4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: question about the new policy
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > let's imagine we have that case: > > python-foo is a python module that uses and needs features from > python2.X. python-bar uses python-foo but can work with all 2.* python > version. > > Python-Versions will be: > * >= 2.X for python-foo > * all for python-bar > > how do we ensure that a user that has a python 2.Y installed, Y < X will > not been able to install python-bar without also pulling python2.X ? python-foo will depend on 'python (>= 2.X)'. When you install python-bar, python-foo is installed and its dependencies must be satisfied. This means that python package will be upgraded to 2.X which will install python2.X. > Is there anything planned to address that ? No, the case you describe is not broken. :-) (The policy is not perfect, you'll find another challenging problem for us I'm sure. :-)) Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Coordinated effort to update python packages
Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > My libgpod package didn't appear in the list because it currently only > builds an python2.3-gpod and no python-gpod at all. Feel free to NMU > this package as I really have no idea about that whole python modules My python2.3-lasso package didn't appear either; I should be there to upload but feel free to send a patch to the BTS. Note it uses autotools, it will be more complicated than setup.py to get more than one python version supported (and it may not be necessary). Frederic -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bugs have been filed, work can begin
On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 11:55 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > Here's a list of sources packages that need to be updated (266 packages): > > http://people.debian.org/~hertzog/python/sources-by-maint > > Pierre Habouzit (Madcoder) did the mass-bug filing: > http://bugs.debian.org/submitter:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://bugs.debian.org/usertag:debian-python@lists.debian.org > > And a wiki page to coordinate the NMUing: > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianPython/BSP > > Everybody's help is welcome now! The mass bug filing caught feedparser, gst0.10-python, gst-python, pygame, and mutagen. All of which I uploaded last night and will be entering unstable shortly. It missed pydance, uligo, and quodlibet, which I have not uploaded (quodlibet can't be until the transition, pydance and uligo I just haven't gotten around to yet). So far, it's not been very helpful. -- Joe Wreschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs have been filed, work can begin
Le mer 14 juin 2006 19:27, Joe Wreschnig a écrit : > On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 11:55 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > Here's a list of sources packages that need to be updated (266 > > > packages): > > > http://people.debian.org/~hertzog/python/sources-by-maint > > > > Pierre Habouzit (Madcoder) did the mass-bug filing: > > http://bugs.debian.org/submitter:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >org http://bugs.debian.org/usertag:debian-python@lists.debian.org > > > > And a wiki page to coordinate the NMUing: > > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianPython/BSP > > > > Everybody's help is welcome now! > > The mass bug filing caught feedparser, gst0.10-python, gst-python, > pygame, and mutagen. All of which I uploaded last night and will be > entering unstable shortly. well, I had to work on a Source list did I ? So I may have opened some bugs that should not, just close them. > It missed pydance, uligo, and quodlibet, which I have not uploaded > (quodlibet can't be until the transition, pydance and uligo I just > haven't gotten around to yet). yes, because I used a trick that Raphael suggested: looking for binary packages named python-* and did not had a Python-Version. We should also list the ones that Buil-Depends upon python, and sort the one that needs a transition and the ones that do not. There is a much higher chance to have dupes in there, and I did not had the time to do it. I caught 254 bugs, maybe 10 are false positive, that's not useless either. > So far, it's not been very helpful. You're welcomed to help filing the missing bugs. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O[EMAIL PROTECTED] OOOhttp://www.madism.org pgpSXZimFKCpx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#373537: python-gd may need an upgrade to the new Python Policy
"Python Transition Mass bug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, your package has been detected as generating a python > module/extension that may need an upgrade to the new Python Policy[1]. > > A wiki page [2] explains what has to be done to upgrade your packages > to the new Policy. This bug may be a false positive, in that case, > please just close the bug. NMUs are welcome on python-gd. I'm also willing to let anyone interested adopt python-gd, because I have not been an active user of it in a long time. Otherwise, I'll probably get to it over the weekend. -- Ben Pfaff email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://benpfaff.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
please nmu python-orbit
Hello, can someone please nmu python-orbit to comply with the new python policy? The bug is #373331. I'm too buzy, and going on vacation now. If someone want to adopt the package, they are welcome to take it. -- Tom Cato Amundsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.solfege.org/ GNU Solfege - free ear traininghttp://www.gnu.org/software/solfege/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Coordinated effort to update python packages
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 at 16:10:48 -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote: > On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 22:05 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: > > What about people who want to use pyxpcom with modules that aren't > > available with the current python ? > > But a user couldn't install more than one such module at a time, since > the packages are mutually exclusive. It seems far better to me to just > force everyone to use one version and avoid the issue. > > Or, fix pyxpcom, which sounds horribly broken. It's not broken, actually. There are 2 different things in pyxpcom: - a python binding to load and use xpcom components - an xpcom component to load and use python written components (pyloader). The problem is that if you launch the python binding, it will also load the pyloader component. If this component doesn't use the same python version as the binding you're using, you're pretty much fscked. Maybe there would be a way not to load the pyloader component if loaded from an incompatible python version... Mike PS: Please CC me, I'm not subscribed -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Coordinated effort to update python packages
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 11:43:21PM +0200, Piotr Ozarowski wrote: > Graham Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > That would happen anyway for new Python releases, plus, my understanding > > is that with the new Python framework in place, supporting new Python > > versions can be handled simply by bin NMUs in the case that I can't make > > an upload myself. > > What if user will change his default python version (f.e. if his scripts > will use /usr/bin/env python, or simply he will start his script with > pythonX.Y)? I'm not sure I understand your question. Why would the user change his default Python version? How would he do that? -- gram -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Coordinated effort to update python packages
Graham Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > What if user will change his default python version (f.e. if his scripts > > will use /usr/bin/env python, or simply he will start his script with > > pythonX.Y)? > > I'm not sure I understand your question. Why would the user change his > default Python version? How would he do that? He can simply change /usr/bin/python symlink (that's very bad, but it's possible) or if he will need some features introduced in new python version and decides to change python version (by changing script's first line to #!/usr/bin/python2.4), will you upload new package just for him? -- -=[ Piotr Ozarowski ]=- -=[ http://www.ozarowski.pl ]=- pgpqIbTlGHk8W.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Coordinated effort to update python packages
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 11:45:32PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > that is correct. OTOH, each new upload to unstable may add a new > dependency on a newly uploaded library having a more strict dependency > or a new soname. If you build for the version we transition from, and > for the version we transition to, we even don't need that binNMU > anymore. Once the python change did migrate to testing and we drop > support for the old supported python version, you can binNMU the > package. So you should provide extensions not only for the default > version, > > - if you depend on shared libaries which take long to migrate to >testing I'm not sure about this. I do use libkpathsea, but I'm not sure about how long it takes for migrating to testing. > - the extension is required as a dependency for a package not using >the default python version. The package is not required by any other packages, and I don't ever envision that happening. > One other side effect: If we include python2.5 in the set of supported > versions in an upload to experimental, we can easily check all > packages for python2.5 compatibility (building at least). Hmm... this seems like a worthwhile thing to support. Basically, I think that adding support for multiple Python versions to my package will not be used, since I expect that the package will only be used with the current version of Python. On the other hand, it sounds like supporting multiple versions will help with transitions. I'm not sure which side I should take, but I suppose that I'm leaning towards supporting multiple versions, since that would make it easier on others. Comments? -- gram -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Coordinated effort to update python packages
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 11:06:53PM +0200, Piotr Ozarowski wrote: > He can simply change /usr/bin/python symlink (that's very bad, but > it's possible) To be honest, I don't think it's worth supporting that, since the user is basically breaking his Python install. > or if he will need some features introduced in new python version and > decides to change python version (by changing script's first line to > #!/usr/bin/python2.4), will you upload new package just for him? This is a good point, and it is one I considered when converting my pakcage a while back from supporting multiple Python version to just one version. At that point I thought making the packaging simpler and having fewer packages in the archive was a better goal than supporting all Python versions. Since it seems possible to both these days, I'm strongly considering doing that. -- gram -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Coordinated effort to update python packages
Piotr Ozarowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > What if user will change his default python version (f.e. if his > > > scripts will use /usr/bin/env python, or simply he will start his > > > script with pythonX.Y)? > > > > I'm not sure I understand your question. Why would the user change his > > default Python version? How would he do that? > > He can simply change /usr/bin/python symlink (that's very bad, but it's > possible) or if he will need some features introduced in new python version > and decides to change python version (by changing script's first line to > #!/usr/bin/python2.4), will you upload new package just for him? This is exactly the situation I am in now. I want to use PyX for plotting but I need some of the features in Python 2.4. Well I probably don't need them, I am sure I could find work arounds, but why should I write code that is more complicated than necessary just so I can use a version of the language that was replaced almost 2 years old? So yes, in the real world users may need/want to use a version of Python other than the default version. By the way, I was able to use the Python 2.3 PyX modules by simply adding them to my PYTHONPATH. So far this seems to be working fine. Cheers, -- Jed Frechette http://jdfrechette.alturl.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Coordinated effort to update python packages
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 06:43:32PM -0600, Jed Frechette wrote: > This is exactly the situation I am in now. I want to use PyX for > plotting but I need some of the features in Python 2.4. Well I > probably don't need them, I am sure I could find work arounds, but why > should I write code that is more complicated than necessary just so I > can use a version of the language that was replaced almost 2 years > old? So yes, in the real world users may need/want to use a version of > Python other than the default version. Since it seems to be the best idea, I've decided to support all of the standard Python versions in PyX (again), so this should be fixed when I make the next upload. > By the way, I was able to use the Python 2.3 PyX modules by simply > adding them to my PYTHONPATH. So far this seems to be working fine. Yeah, the PyX module is mostly just regular Python code. -- gram -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
