Interest in packaging python-dotenv?
Dear Python-modules team, is anyone interested (or already working on) packaging python-dotenv? From all *dotenv packages it is currently the most famous one for python. It allows for using .env files in python and provides a command line tool: https://github.com/theskumar/python-dotenv Cheers, Bastian
Re: Ad-hoc Debian Python BoF at PyCon US 2017
On 10.06.2017 05:32, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Jun 06, 2017, at 10:57 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote: > >> if we plan (and it looks like we do) to support and distribute 2.7 >> with buster, why not support it *properly*? what's the point of >> deprecating python2.7? either we ship it or not, but if we do then >> let's not cripple it by removing python2 modules packages. do yo think >> that just because the module i want to use is not available will make >> realize "oh sh*t, let's migrate this 50k lines of code application to >> py3k so that i can implement this 5-minutes-of-work-funcionality if i >> had the module on py2"? > > So what's the plan for when upstream stops supporting Python 2 in 2020? Given > the pronouncement at Pycon 2017 that maintenance will end at Pycon 2020, we > really need to decide what Debian's official policy will be, and what the > timeline will be to get there. > > If Buster is 2 years in development, that means it will be the last Debian > release before Python 2.7 is EOL'd. Yes, I know it's possible that 2.7 will > get security releases for some time after that, but that's a much reduced > commitment from upstream. > > Once upstream stops supporting 2.7, should we also stop supporting it? That > wouldn't mean that developers on Debian can't use Python 2.7, just that they > will be on their own. I know it sucks for people who can't port to Python 3, > but if a decade or more isn't enough time to switch, then that's really saying > they'll never switch, and how much responsibility does Debian have at that > point? > > Python 2.7 isn't going away today, but 3 years goes by quickly and we need to > decide what our policy will be when the day arrives. There's a big chunk of work getting the python2 dependencies replaced by python3 dependencies. I think we should track these packages with bug reports, so that every source package depending on python2 only, and not providing python3 binary packages has it's own bug report. For now, one big cluster might be packages b-d on python-sphinx instead of python3-sphinx, another one many openstack packages. We can only speculate on the amount of work until we have such a list ... Matthias
Re: python3 statsmodels?
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:18 AM, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > I see that there is no statsmodels package for python3 in Stretch. > > % apt-cache search statsmodels python3 > python3-seaborn - statistical visualization library statsmodels is maintained by Debian science team (https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/statsmodels) so i suggest to contact them directly (CCed them here) -- Sandro "morph" Tosi My website: http://sandrotosi.me/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi
Re: python3 statsmodels?
On Tue, 20 Jun 2017, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:18 AM, kamaraju kusumanchi > wrote: > > I see that there is no statsmodels package for python3 in Stretch. > > % apt-cache search statsmodels python3 > > python3-seaborn - statistical visualization library > statsmodels is maintained by Debian science team > (https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/statsmodels) so i suggest to contact > them directly (CCed them here) yeap -- would be lovely to have python3 build... debian/rules is quite ad-hoc/elaborate but somewhat inline with how things are done for pandas as well... I might look into it at some point (but not within upcoming 2 weeks) but would even more appreciate help from the team mates or outside contributors ;) Cheers -- Yaroslav O. Halchenko Center for Open Neuroscience http://centerforopenneuroscience.org Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755 Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834 Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419 WWW: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik
Re: Ad-hoc Debian Python BoF at PyCon US 2017
On 2017-06-20 16:40:26 +0200 (+0200), Matthias Klose wrote: [...] > another one many openstack packages. [...] Spot checking the source packages in the archive currently, it looks like Thomas already has most of these done. By way of background there, a coordinated effort has been underway for the last several years to get all OpenStack software working with recent Python 3 interpreters. The slowest part of that work involved reaching out to the upstreams of (hundreds of) dependencies not maintained within the OpenStack community and either helping them get working Py3K support, adopting defunct libraries so OpenStack contributors could fix them directly, or in some cases abandoning/replacing dependencies with better-maintained alternatives. This really is an ecosystem-wide effort, as complex Python software doesn't generally run in isolation. I expect the story for other large Python-based applications is very similar to this. Most OpenStack services and libraries are integration-tested upstream to work under Python 3.5 today, but there are still many Python-2.7-only testsuites for them (especially unit testing and some functional tests) which need heavy refitting before the community feels its Py3K support efforts are truly complete. -- Jeremy Stanley signature.asc Description: Digital signature
