RFS: pynagram (updated package)

2011-06-13 Thread Umang Varma
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.0.1-1 of my package "pynagram". The previous sponsor has indicated that he is too busy to sponsor pynagram. It builds these binary packages: pynagram - anagram word game The package appears to be lintian clean. (Apart from the peda

Re: RFS: python-peak.util

2011-06-13 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Daniele Tricoli , 2011-06-14, 03:05: I tried to use the multiple upstream tarballs in Debian source packages, but I discovered that svn-buildpackage doesn't support it. Sure it does. Great! http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/DebSrc3.0 should be updated. It point to #577140: it should be already

Re: RFS: python-peak.util

2011-06-13 Thread Daniele Tricoli
On Tuesday 14 June 2011 02:47:16 Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Daniele Tricoli , 2011-06-14, 02:26: > >I tried to use the multiple upstream tarballs in Debian source > >packages, but I discovered that svn-buildpackage doesn't support it. > > Sure it does. Great! http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/DebSrc3.0

Re: RFS: python-peak.util

2011-06-13 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Daniele Tricoli , 2011-06-14, 02:26: I tried to use the multiple upstream tarballs in Debian source packages, but I discovered that svn-buildpackage doesn't support it. Sure it does. -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubsc

RFS: python-peak.util

2011-06-13 Thread Daniele Tricoli
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-peak.util". It builds these binary packages: python-peak.util - utilities from the Python Enterprise Application Kit The upload would fix these bugs: #606382, #607083 Fixing #606382 will close also an FTBFS (LP: #795096) on Ubuntu (

Re: private modules and dh_python2

2011-06-13 Thread Piotr Ożarowski
[Barry Warsaw, 2011-06-13] > it's > fine to include things like a `test` (Python) subpackage in the (Debian) > package python-foo. It aligns with the Python "consenting adults" motto, and > I think such things *can* be useful. As long as the top-level package name is > unique, subpackage can't po

Re: Looking for sponsor: python-llfuse

2011-06-13 Thread Nikolaus Rath
Vincent Bernat writes: >>> I don't think that python-all-dbg and python3-all-dbg will be needed >>> to build the package. > >> To build the debug versions, I'm calling python-dbg setup.py (so I need >> python-*-dbg). Is that the wrong thing to do? > > I was not aware that this was the way to do it

Re: Looking for sponsor: python-llfuse

2011-06-13 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO En ce début de soirée du lundi 13 juin 2011, vers 21:50, Nikolaus Rath disait : >> debian/changelog: >> >> This is a bit unusual to describe non change related things here, but I >> am fine with it. > That was in response to Jacob's request. I'm fine to put it somewhere > else (or not d

Re: Looking for sponsor: python-llfuse

2011-06-13 Thread Nikolaus Rath
Vincent Bernat writes: > OoO En cette nuit nuageuse du lundi 13 juin 2011, vers 01:04, Nikolaus > Rath disait : > >>> Or Maintainer: Nikolaus, Uploader: DPMT. And DPMT is: >>> Debian Python Modules Team > >> Done. Package is in the DPMT SVN now. > > debian/changelog: > > This is a bit unusual

Re: Looking for sponsor: python-llfuse

2011-06-13 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO En cette nuit nuageuse du lundi 13 juin 2011, vers 01:04, Nikolaus Rath disait : >> Or Maintainer: Nikolaus, Uploader: DPMT. And DPMT is: >> Debian Python Modules Team > Done. Package is in the DPMT SVN now. debian/changelog: This is a bit unusual to describe non change related things

Re: private modules and dh_python2

2011-06-13 Thread Barry Warsaw
As an aside, I notice that Debian Python Policy begins by assuming people know what "private Python modules" are, but this will not be the case for most Python developers unfamiliar with Debian conventions. Section 2.1 briefly mentions the distinction from a sys.path-visibility point of view, whic