Re: Updating python-django-tagging (0.4.1 -> 0.4.3)
Hello, On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 12:30:59PM +0100, Christopher Baines wrote: Hey, Is anyone available to review and upload a new version of python-django-tagging [1][2]? The changelog is: * New upstream release * Convert debian/copyright to the DEP-5 format * Add myself as an uploader * Remove the fix_calc_tag_weight patch, as this has been merged upstream * Remove the fix-testsuite patch, as this is unnecessary Thanks, Chris 1: https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/packages/python-django-tagging.git/ 2: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python-django-tagging It's been a while. I have pushed an update since a new version is out (0.4.5) and a smaller set of fixes. I plan to upload it in sid in a day or two. So, anyone interested, please take a look. Since python-django-tagging is removed from testing and currently no re-entries are allowed, stretch might be released without the package. Ufortunately this affects graphite-web which depends on python-django-tagging. But, I assume that we can ask for an exception from the release team. Either way, uploading to sid is a first step.
Re: Binary naming for Django Related Packages
On Wednesday, December 07, 2016 11:43:29 AM Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 30 Nov 2016, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > Raphael, do you think that the upstream Django project might be willing to > > make some kind of best practices for naming third party django packages? > > If they did that, then that would give us a basis for Debian maintainers > > talking to their upstreams about moving to django_. > > They already partly do that, see: > https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.10/intro/reusable-apps/#packaging-your-a > pp > > They recommend a "django-" prefix in the PyPi package name. But they say > nothing about the Python module name and the sample just bundles a "polls" > module in a "django-polls" package. > > Thus I posted this to gather their feedback on the need to recommend the > prefix on the name of the module too: > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/django-developers/f8yNRkn6Fpo Thanks. Since not everyone liked my first attempt at this, I softened it a bit (please see the attached). We're going to have at least one more python- defaults upload and I'd like to get this resolved. Scott K=== modified file 'debian/python-policy.sgml' --- debian/python-policy.sgml 2016-11-26 07:23:09 + +++ debian/python-policy.sgml 2017-01-18 06:39:18 + @@ -628,14 +628,16 @@ versions should be included in a single package. - As a special exception to the python3- and - python- binary naming policy, Python modules - intended for use with Django (python3-django/ - python-django) should add django to their binary - package names to make it clear they are intended for use with Django - and not general purpose Python modules, i.e. - python3-django- and - python-django- respectively. + Packages intended for use with Django (python3-django/ + python-django) are installed in the same namespace as + other python packages for a variety of reasons. Many such packages are + named django_packagename upstream. These are then packaged as + python3-django-package and + python-django-package. + This makes it clear that they are intended for use with Django + and not general purpose Python modules. Debian maintainers are + encouraged to work with their upstreams to support consistent use of + this approach. Specifying Supported Versions
http://pypi.debian.net/ down?
Hi, lots of watch files are reported as failing since (at least yesterday). Is something wrong with http://pypi.debian.net/ ? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: http://pypi.debian.net/ down?
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > lots of watch files are reported as failing since (at least yesterday). > Is something wrong with http://pypi.debian.net/ ? There was an issue renewing sponsorship of the VM. There is a proposal on debian-admin to move it to DSA. DSA hasn't responded to it yet. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
