Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-07-05 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 07/05/2016 04:47 PM, Hugo Lefeuvre wrote: > Hi Thomas, > >> I did lots of that in OpenStack. You can have a look at one of our tool >> to handle the dh_auto_install for Python: >> >> http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/openstack/openstack-pkg-tools.git/tree/build-tools/pkgos-dh_auto_install >> >> Th

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-07-05 Thread Hugo Lefeuvre
Hi Thomas, > I did lots of that in OpenStack. You can have a look at one of our tool > to handle the dh_auto_install for Python: > > http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/openstack/openstack-pkg-tools.git/tree/build-tools/pkgos-dh_auto_install > > The way to use it in your debian/rules file is to do: >

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-07-05 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 06/22/2016 09:51 PM, Hugo Lefeuvre wrote: > Hi Ben, > >>> The package is originally requested as a Python module[2] and it seems >>> clear to me that the whole thing is only useful as a library >> >> I don't understand this statement. If it is *only* useful as a library, >> why install the com

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-07-05 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 06/21/2016 11:13 PM, Hugo Lefeuvre wrote: > Hi all ! > > I'm currently packaging python-slugify[0], a Python application for > slugifying unicode strings. Like here[1] upstream decided to write > everything as a python module with an entry script placed in /usr/bin > that calls main(). So we c

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-06-29 Thread Hugo Lefeuvre
> So the question would rather be: how can I properly ask pybuild (setup.py ?) > to install the entry point in the application package (slugify) instead of > installing it in the library packages (python{3}-slugify) ? So, if nobody knows, I think I'll upload the package as is. Thanks anyway ! :

Re: Python program as a command-line program (was: Python package providing both modules and an app)

2016-06-24 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Jun 23, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Ben Finney wrote: >There isn't, AFAIK, anything portable that I can write in the shebang to >turn a command invocation of ‘./foo/bar.py’ into ‘python3 -m foo.bar’. Why not just have a file that contains only? exec python3 -m foo.bar Cheers, -Barry

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-06-23 Thread Hugo Lefeuvre
> > The entry point is generated by 'setup.py install_scripts', which is > > executed by pybuild after files specified in *.install have been > > installed (correct me if I'm wrong). > > I haven't demonstrated for this case, but I would be surprised if that's > how it behaves. To my mind the ‘setu

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-06-22 Thread Ian Cordasco
On Jun 22, 2016 7:54 PM, "Barry Warsaw" wrote: > > On Jun 22, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Ben Finney wrote: > > >This seems to be more common now that command-line invocation is > >becoming even more discouraged. When the upstream documentation > >recommends ‘python3 -m foo.bar’ as the primary means of inv

Python program as a command-line program (was: Python package providing both modules and an app)

2016-06-22 Thread Ben Finney
Barry Warsaw writes: > On Jun 22, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Ben Finney wrote: > > >There is a compounding tendency to disparage ‘python3 ./foo/bar.py’, > >[…]. I wish this trend could be effectively reversed, because IMO > >this is a serious impediment to considering Python a good choice for > >command-

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-06-22 Thread Ben Finney
Hugo Lefeuvre writes: > The entry point is generated by 'setup.py install_scripts', which is > executed by pybuild after files specified in *.install have been > installed (correct me if I'm wrong). I haven't demonstrated for this case, but I would be surprised if that's how it behaves. To my mi

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-06-22 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Jun 22, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Ben Finney wrote: >This seems to be more common now that command-line invocation is >becoming even more discouraged. When the upstream documentation >recommends ‘python3 -m foo.bar’ as the primary means of invoking the >command line functionality, that really blurs th

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-06-22 Thread Hugo Lefeuvre
Hi Ben, > > The package is originally requested as a Python module[2] and it seems > > clear to me that the whole thing is only useful as a library > > I don't understand this statement. If it is *only* useful as a library, > why install the command-line entry point? Indeed, I though about that

Re: Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-06-21 Thread Ben Finney
Hugo Lefeuvre writes: > I'm currently packaging python-slugify[0], a Python application for > slugifying unicode strings. Thank you for considering the issues and asking for advice. > Like here[1] upstream decided to write everything as a python module > with an entry script placed in /usr/bin

Python package providing both modules and an app

2016-06-21 Thread Hugo Lefeuvre
Hi all ! I'm currently packaging python-slugify[0], a Python application for slugifying unicode strings. Like here[1] upstream decided to write everything as a python module with an entry script placed in /usr/bin that calls main(). So we can consider python-slugify as both an application and a l