Re: Python talks at DebConf
On May 08, 2010, at 10:55 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: >The only reason I got from Ubuntu for doing transitions outside Debian >and allowing Debian to do it later (and forcing us to fix after them) >is... "because you are slow". All technical reasons (like relative >imports in 2.6) were easy to prove wrong. I'm sure Ubuntu guys are not >crazy and do not break universe on purpose (main is always well tested) >so I'd love to hear their reasons. I know nothing about the history of this so I won't comment on it. Note that today is the first day of the Ubuntu Developer Summit for Ubuntu 10.10. On Thursday we are going to have a session to discuss the roadmap for Python on Ubuntu and what version(s) we will ship by default in 10.10. I invite your constructive input in this thread about issues that you'd like to see discussed. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/Specs/MaverickPythonVersions Cheers, -Barry signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Python talks at DebConf
[Barry Warsaw, 2010-05-10] > Note that today is the first day of the Ubuntu Developer Summit for Ubuntu > 10.10. On Thursday we are going to have a session to discuss the roadmap for > Python on Ubuntu and what version(s) we will ship by default in 10.10. I > invite your constructive input in this thread about issues that you'd like to > see discussed. IMHO derivatives should not add new versions to the list of supported Pythons and most probably not change default Python version as well (it should be OK to remove a version from supported ones[0]). We cannot tell derivatives what to do, though. I'd never complain in public and would let you do whatever you want (that's derivative's right after all)... if Ubuntu's decisions would not have so strong impact on us - when I'm forced to do something (specially when I have to do it in one month or so), I try to resist by default, even if changes are good for me in the end, like dist-packages or /usr/local by default change introduced in Ubuntu (good changes need testing too!). Why I think derivatives should not add new versions? * because it's mostly chasing numbers - I'm pretty sure there are not more than 10 packages that require Python >= 2.6 and are not easy to port to 2.5 in Ubuntu 10.04, * because when you have to convert hundreds of packages, without checking them carefully (most packages in Ubuntu don't have maintainer assigned to them) you end up with "fixes" like: - disabling tests, - breaking perfectly valid XS-Python-Version or debian/pyversions, - hardcoding "-I /usr/include/python2.6" in debian/rules (yes, 2.5 was still in supported when I saw it) or no fixes at all (>100 packages that FTBFS, ignoring broken XS-Python-Version or debian/pyversions, packages that build correctly, pass all tests... and do not work[1]), * because new version often means changes in helper tools (cdbs, debhelper, python-central, python-support) and you're risking the situation where we will not like your implementation and will rewrite them in incompatible way (and that will mean you will have to rewrite them again), * because we're supporting upgrades from oldstable only (do you know how many packages in Ubuntu are suffering from missing/too many Conflicts/Replaces/Provides: pythonX.Y-foo?) (this argument is actually semi related, as you cannot do much if we will drop support for one of versions and you still support it in LTS) * because of crazy ideas like implementing "include-symlinks" in python-support or using virtualenv in Debian packages as workarounds ;-P [0] if you will also drop all packages that depend on it even after rebuild [1] gaupol works in Ubuntu only because I pointed Scott to it, nobody noticed it in Ubuntu (and I know it wasn't working with python2.6 only because I always read changelogs / debdiffs of packages I maintain) Note that gaupol is not the only package of mine that needed a sync with Debian and I do not maintain that many packages... -- Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645 -- 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/20100510112301.gb28...@piotro.eu
Re: Python talks at DebConf
Hi Piotr, On Mon, 10.05.2010 at 13:23:01 +0200, Piotr O??arowski wrote: > derivatives what to do, though. I'd never complain in public and would > let you do whatever you want (that's derivative's right after all)... if > Ubuntu's decisions would not have so strong impact on us - when I'm thanks for the interesting statements. I somewhat fail to see the problem. It's their choice to deviate from Debian packaging, so why shouldn't it be also their problem (not ours) if they break stuff, too? Reading your email I consider adding a README.Ubuntu file to my packages and/or publish a notice on my d.p.o web page to highlight the distinction. > or no fixes at all (>100 packages that FTBFS, ignoring broken They FTBFS on Ubuntu, not Debian, right? So why do you care? Kind regards, --Toni++ -- 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/20100510161904.29503.qm...@oak.oeko.net
Re: Python talks at DebConf
[Toni Mueller, 2010-05-10] > On Mon, 10.05.2010 at 13:23:01 +0200, Piotr O??arowski > wrote: > > derivatives what to do, though. I'd never complain in public and would > > let you do whatever you want (that's derivative's right after all)... if > > Ubuntu's decisions would not have so strong impact on us - when I'm > > thanks for the interesting statements. I somewhat fail to see the > problem. It's their choice to deviate from Debian packaging, so why > shouldn't it be also their problem (not ours) if they break stuff, too? changes in Python interpreter or python-central are later uploaded to Debian so we have to update all other packages the same way (it's even worse when only one of these packages is synced with Ubuntu) > Reading your email I consider adding a README.Ubuntu file to my > packages and/or publish a notice on my d.p.o web page to highlight the > distinction. I had to explain many times (mostly to Pylons users) why packages not touched by Ubuntu developers are not working on Ubuntu, I know the pain. > > or no fixes at all (>100 packages that FTBFS, ignoring broken > > They FTBFS on Ubuntu, not Debian, right? So why do you care? I want as many users to use my packages as possible. I want to give Ubuntu CDs to my friends telling them that there are few bits of my work there. I don't want to explain to them that there is my name there but the package is not working because Ubuntu decided to ship Python 2.6.5 instead of 2.6.4 (not to mention python2.6 vs. python2.5 problems) -- Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Towards Python 2.6: status update
I've gone through all bugs that are known to interfere with Python 2.6 transition: either bugs directly related to the new Python version or FTBFSes in packages that need to be binNMUed. I've put bugs/packages into three categories: 1. Show-stoppers These packages must be fixed before new python-defaults is uploaded: * kdebindings FTBFS on armel; no bug filed but maintainers are aware of the problem * setools FTBFS on armel due to GCC 4.4 ABI changes (#577061) 2. Non-show-stoppers There are several buggy packages which have low popcon (< 100). I believe that they should not stop us from uploading new python-defaults; instead they should be removed from testing if they were going to delay the transition. * dballe (#581008) * doclifter (#580246) * flumotion (#561347) * libavg (#580678) * necpp (#580812) * nipy (#577898) * pylucene (#571545) * pymol (#576210) * w3af-console (#571110) 3. Not in testing = These packages are known to have issues, but have been already removed from testing: * jppy * libhid * petsc4py * player * polybori * sagemath * sqlrelay * zhone -- Jakub Wilk signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Python talks at DebConf
On Mon, 10.05.2010 at 21:17:40 +0200, Piotr O??arowski wrote: > [Toni Mueller, 2010-05-10] > > problem. It's their choice to deviate from Debian packaging, so why > > shouldn't it be also their problem (not ours) if they break stuff, too? > changes in Python interpreter or python-central are later > uploaded to Debian so we have to update all other packages the same way > (it's even worse when only one of these packages is synced with Ubuntu) It's still only a problem in Ubuntu until Debian makes a possibly similar transition, right? > I want as many users to use my packages as possible. This is nice. I also "want" many users of my packages, but there are limits to what I can do. > I want to give Ubuntu CDs to my friends telling them that there are > few bits of my work there. I don't want to explain to them that there > is my name there but the package is not working because Ubuntu > decided to ship Python 2.6.5 instead of 2.6.4 (not to mention > python2.6 vs. python2.5 problems) So, what's wrong with giving them a Debian CD instead? Kind regards, --Toni++ PS: The address "www.griffith.cc" that you mention in your .sig, does not resolve, and afair, Berlios is not a good project host. -- 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/20100510213425.17152.qm...@oak.oeko.net
Re: Python talks at DebConf
[Toni Mueller, 2010-05-10] > It's still only a problem in Ubuntu until Debian makes a possibly > similar transition, right? The problem is it's out of our hands. > > I want to give Ubuntu CDs to my friends telling them that there are > > few bits of my work there. I don't want to explain to them that there > > is my name there but the package is not working because Ubuntu > > decided to ship Python 2.6.5 instead of 2.6.4 (not to mention > > python2.6 vs. python2.5 problems) > > So, what's wrong with giving them a Debian CD instead? Nothing, I just happen to have few more Ubuntu CDs (and only one Debian DVD). FWIW, I installed Debian on my sister's laptop few years ago and she is still using it (I'm the one who remotely dist-upgrades it). I installed Ubuntu on my brother's laptop and it's not there anymore (he removed it after one of upgrades that didn't work that well) > PS: The address "www.griffith.cc" that you mention in your .sig, does > not resolve, and afair, Berlios is not a good project host. To which IP your DNS points you to? We're moving away from berliOS -- Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
join to python-x
hi , i'm new. i want to join python-module or python apps team to start working on debian, how can i join one of these team ? -- 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/aanlktiku0e3is86ff7xjy4xzmtyasxfshcq26r8si...@mail.gmail.com
Re: join to python-x
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 08:46, Sameer Rahmani wrote: > hi , > i'm new. i want to join python-module or python apps team to start > working on debian, how can i join one of these team ? http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/PythonModulesTeam/HowToJoin -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- 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/i2h8b2d7b4d1005102355l2daed16cv134f83c44939e...@mail.gmail.com
