Am 07.05.2014 16:45, schrieb Matthias Klose:
> Attached is a proposed change to the Debian Python policy to focus on Python3
> within the distribution. The intent is to document and start a large journey
> towards one Python stack in Debian. This is unlikely to happen for jessie+1,
> but
> we sho
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Attached is a proposed change to the Debian Python policy to focus on Python3
> within the distribution. The intent is to document and start a large journey
> towards one Python stack in Debian. This is unlikely to happen for jessie+1,
> b
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On May 07, 2014, at 02:29 PM, Thomas Kluyver wrote:
>
>>This fork looks like it's actively maintained, and has a recent release on
>>PyPI (as suds-jurko):
>>https://bitbucket.org/jurko/suds
>
> There seems to be quite a few forks on PyPI:
>
> h
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> FWIW, while I think getting the python policy to recommend Python3 is a good
>> step forward, I think it's more important that we make sure the base system
>> is leading by example.
On May 07, 2014, at 02:29 PM, Thomas Kluyver wrote:
>This fork looks like it's actively maintained, and has a recent release on
>PyPI (as suds-jurko):
>https://bitbucket.org/jurko/suds
There seems to be quite a few forks on PyPI:
https://pypi.python.org/pypi?%3Aaction=search&term=suds&submit=sea
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 11:43:24PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 07.05.2014 23:01, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:15:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >> Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> + ++ +
> Applications sho
On May 07, 2014, at 11:43 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>thas was "tools outside the archive". Debian has some infrastructure written
>in Python. I don't know if all of this is packaged and available in the
>archive.
I'm personally less concerned about those than packages inside the archive.
-Barr
On May 07, 2014, at 02:01 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
>I don't think scripts "outside the archive" are in scope for the python
>policy; and I don't think this is what Barry was referring to. I think he
>meant python commandline programs, which some people may not think of as
>being "applications"?
Am 07.05.2014 23:01, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:15:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
+ ++ + Applications
should use
Python3, and should not be + packaged for Python2 as we
On 7 May 2014 14:11, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> If I had more time to blow, I'd likely try a run at something SUDS API
> compatible in Python 3. Won't happen any time soon for me, but it's
> something I will eternally praise someone over.
>
> So many people have tried to forward-port the SUDS code
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:15:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
>> >> +
>> >> +
>> >> +
>> >> +Applications should use Python3, and should not be
>> >> +packaged for Py
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:15:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> >> +
> >> +
> >> +
> >> +Applications should use Python3, and should not be
> >> +packaged for Python2 as well.
> >> +
> > Maybe also that system scripts
On May 08, 2014, at 06:41 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
>Can we converge on a single way to represent the names of these systems
>in the document? Currently there seems to be “python3”, “Python3”,
>“Python 3” used indiscriminately, without being clear why they would be
>spelled differently like that.
>
>I
Matthias Klose writes:
> === modified file 'debian/python-policy.sgml'
> --- debian/python-policy.sgml 2013-05-22 02:12:02 +
> +++ debian/python-policy.sgml 2014-05-07 14:34:24 +
[…]
> @@ -42,8 +42,7 @@
>
>
>
> - Copyright © 1999, 2001, 2003, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2011,
Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
>> +
>> +
>> +
>> + Applications should use Python3, and should not be
>> + packaged for Python2 as well.
>> +
>
> Maybe also that system scripts written in Python should be Python 3 and not
> Python 2. I'd add
On Wednesday, May 07, 2014 11:27:20 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Should we also update Appendix B to promote --buildsystem=pybuild or at
> least reference it?
It's a reasonably safe bet that almost anything needs update.
Scott K
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with
On May 07, 2014, at 04:45 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>Attached is a proposed change to the Debian Python policy to focus on Python3
>within the distribution. The intent is to document and start a large journey
>towards one Python stack in Debian. This is unlikely to happen for jessie+1,
>but we sh
17 matches
Mail list logo
