Bug#972415: ITP: jupyter-server -- Jupyter protocol server backend
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-python@lists.debian.org * Package name: jupyter-server Version: 1.0.5 Upstream author: Jupyter Development Team * URL: https://github.com/jupyter/jupyter_server License: BSD-3-clause Description: Jupyter protocol server backend It's a step towards packaging more recent versions of the Jupyter project ecosystem. I plan to maintain it within the Debian Python Team, along with the other Jupyter-related packages. Cheers, JP
Jupyter project packaging effort
Hi, my first goal was to update nbconvert -- but it needs a more recent nbsphinx. So I have a look at nbsphinx. Ah, it requires a more recent ipywidgets. Now ipywidgets gets interesting : that package suffers from a lack of love, for reasons made obvious below. The purely Python part is ok, but there's a widgetsnbextension/ directory. "Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate" would be a more suitable name, though longer. What is it? A trivial Python code, with a few javascript source files, which need to be "compiled" (webpack'ed, really). The package existed, so it just needs brushing, ok? Well, the short answer is: no. The longer answer is that in debian/, there is a lot of javascript code. Not even always sources. When the package was (last) prepared, Debian lacked many, many things on the javascript side, so there was little choice in the matter. The elephant in the room is webpack : but now we have it! There are still probably dozens of missing depends, all in a dep graph, probably not a tree (there will be loops). I'll probably prepare quite a few package both in the Debian Python Team and the Debian Javascript Maintainers Team. I'm sorry if I'm breaking some things along the way : I'll do my best to avoid that, but from experience you can hardly upgrade things on one side without breaking something on another... Help is welcome, JP
Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Jupyter project packaging effort
Hi Julien, Great that you are improving some packages. I have a hard time understanding what you are trying to say in your post below, however... Quoting Julien Puydt (2020-10-18 09:55:27) [ long rant about how proper packaging is hard and may fail ] > Help is welcome, Did I understand your message correctly, or did I miss something? - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Python 3.9 for bullseye
Python 3.9 as a supported Python3 version is now in unstable, and all binNMUs are done (thanks to Graham for the work). Bug reports should be all filed for all known problems [1], and the current state of the 3.9 addition can be seen at [2] (a few of the "bad" are false packages with b-d n python3-all-dev, but not building for 3.9, bug reports also filed). The major outstanding issue is the pandas stack, all other problems are found in leaf packages (leaf in the sense of that no other package for the 3.9 addition is blocked). Please help fixing the remaining issues! Matthias [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=python3.9;users=debian-python@lists.debian.org [2] https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/python3.9.html
