Thanks, Thomas, that's a great resource. I had been looking at some
files from existing Python 3 packages, but that makes it clearer.
I'll now focus on wrapping up the Python 2 package, and then I'll move
on to the Python 3 version.
Thanks again!
On 08/11/12 15:28, Thomas Kluyver wrote:
> On 8 N
On 8 November 2012 14:15, Andreas Tille wrote:
> As far as I have followed this thread I have not seen an answer to this
> part of your mail. I admit I have no idea how to support Python 2 *and*
> 3 but wild-guessing from my experience with Debian tools I doubt any
> manual code writing would b
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 12:30:41PM +0100, Tomás Di Domenico wrote:
> Thank you very much for your input, Jakub and Dmitry. I'll start working
> on those changes right away. And yes, it would be very nice to try and
> get a Python3 version up. In fact, I'm quite interested in learning how
> to
On 07/11/12 16:06, Tomás Di Domenico wrote:
> On 07/11/12 16:43, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>> * Tomás Di Domenico , 2012-11-07, 12:30:
>>> About the different versions in the git repository and the upstream
>>> package, that is actually my fault. I checked out the code from the
>>> upstream Mercurial repos
Right, that's what I meant. Poor wording on my side, sorry about that.
Thanks!
On 07/11/12 17:25, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Tomás Di Domenico wrote:
>> Also, out of curiosity, is there ever the case where you will build a package
>> against a particular build, with
On 07/11/12 16:43, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Tomás Di Domenico , 2012-11-07, 12:30:
>> About the different versions in the git repository and the upstream
>> package, that is actually my fault. I checked out the code from the
>> upstream Mercurial repository and built the tarball myself, hence
>> using
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Tomás Di Domenico wrote:
> Also, out of curiosity, is there ever the case where you will build a package
> against a particular build, without it being officially released by upstream?
You mean packaging snapshots from upstream VCS, right? That is
possible, but I w
* Tomás Di Domenico , 2012-11-07, 12:30:
About the different versions in the git repository and the upstream
package, that is actually my fault. I checked out the code from the
upstream Mercurial repository and built the tarball myself, hence using
a more recent version than the one in the tarb
Thank you very much for your input, Jakub and Dmitry. I'll start working
on those changes right away. And yes, it would be very nice to try and
get a Python3 version up. In fact, I'm quite interested in learning how
to manually write the code, without dh (though I foresee it will take me
some time
* Dmitry Shachnev , 2012-11-07, 13:35:
Maybe it's too pedantic, but here is what I can add to Jakub's
comments:
- no dependency on ${python:Depends}, please add it;
This is one is certainly not too pendantic; it's a serious problem.
Thanks for spotting it.
- debian/docs is empty, please e
Hi Tomás,
Maybe it's too pedantic, but here is what I can add to Jakub's comments:
- no dependency on ${python:Depends}, please add it;
- debian/docs is empty, please either fill it or delete the file.
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Tomás Di Domenico wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> I've recently joine
* Tomás Di Domenico , 2012-11-04, 15:43:
I've recently joined the Debian Med team, and am currently trying to
package my first project, the CSB bioinformatics toolbox [1]. CSB is
similar to the already packaged Biopython group of modules, but dealing
exclusively with the structural side of bioi
Greetings.
I've recently joined the Debian Med team, and am currently trying to
package my first project, the CSB bioinformatics toolbox [1]. CSB is
similar to the already packaged Biopython group of modules, but dealing
exclusively with the structural side of bioinformatics. This is the
reason wh
13 matches
Mail list logo
