Howdy all,
Over at the ‘python-dev’ forum, PEP 453 is being discussed. This affects
Debian packaging of Python, and packages written for Python.
See the discussion thread and take the opportunity to represent Debian
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-September/128723.html>
while th
We don't do "private copies" or "bundled copies" in Debian, so I guess
the right way to go for Debian is to have python depend on python-pip
and python3 depend on python3-pip?
http://wiki.debian.org/EmbeddedCodeCopies
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to d
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 09:38:57 +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
> We don't do "private copies" or "bundled copies" in Debian, so I guess
> the right way to go for Debian is to have python depend on python-pip
> and python3 depend on python3-pip?
>
We don't do dependency loops without a good reason eithe
Am 18.09.2013 09:48, schrieb Julien Cristau:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 09:38:57 +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
>
>> We don't do "private copies" or "bundled copies" in Debian, so I guess
>> the right way to go for Debian is to have python depend on python-pip
>> and python3 depend on python3-pip?
>>
> We
On Wednesday, September 18, 2013 17:16:22 Ben Finney wrote:
> Howdy all,
>
> Over at the ‘python-dev’ forum, PEP 453 is being discussed. This affects
> Debian packaging of Python, and packages written for Python.
>
> See the discussion thread and take the opportunity to represent Debian
> https:/
Quoting "Matthias Klose" :
Also the platform package manager should be the preferred way to install
packages, not pip, so even a Recommends is a bit strange.
Yes, a "not-recommended" field would make sense here.
As a passionate pip hater I would go for a Conflicts,
which finally would make pip
[W. Martin Borgert, 2013-09-18]
> As a passionate pip hater I would go for a Conflicts,
> which finally would make pip uninstallable :~)
> Next steps: get rid of gem, npm, EPT, ...
+1 (unless all these "wheel re-inventors" will speed up a bit - they're
still where Linux packagers were 5-10 years a
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 03:22:19PM +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [W. Martin Borgert, 2013-09-18]
> > As a passionate pip hater I would go for a Conflicts,
> > which finally would make pip uninstallable :~)
> > Next steps: get rid of gem, npm, EPT, ...
>
> +1 (unless all these "wheel re-inventors
Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 03:22:19PM +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>> [W. Martin Borgert, 2013-09-18]
>> > As a passionate pip hater I would go for a Conflicts,
>> > which finally would make pip uninstallable :~)
>> > Next steps: get rid of gem, npm, EPT, ...
>>
>> +1 (un
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:33:52AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I object to the mandatory nature of the proposal and the associated be sure
> to document for your users why you were idiots and didn't ship this. End
> users should not need these kinds of tools.
I agree.
> I think that intro
[Paul Tagliamonte, 2013-09-18]
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 03:22:19PM +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> > [W. Martin Borgert, 2013-09-18]
> > > As a passionate pip hater I would go for a Conflicts,
> > > which finally would make pip uninstallable :~)
> > > Next steps: get rid of gem, npm, EPT, ...
> >
Following the “if it didn't happen on a mailing list, it didn't happen”, I
repeat here what I said on IRC:
12:26 < kwilk> So I rebuilt src:python-aalib, and I ended up these Depends:
"python3:any (>= 3.3.2-2~), libaa1".
12:27 < kwilk> This is wrong; the package only works if the interpreter
ar
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> P.S. I'm not nominating myself to be the diplomat that talks to upstream for
> what are probably obvious reasons.
Too late, upstream folks (for eg Barry Warsaw) are on this list, are
DDs and are part of the Debian Python community so you
On 18 September 2013 08:41, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> so instead of reinventing the wheel and trying to make something that
> works everywhere they should make it easier for others to convert
> whatever they provide (tarballs?) into .rpm, .deb or .exe.
>
>From a developer point of view: this leav
Paul Wise wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>> P.S. I'm not nominating myself to be the diplomat that talks to
>upstream for what are probably obvious reasons.
>
>Too late, upstream folks (for eg Barry Warsaw) are on this list, are
>DDs and are part of the Debian
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 06:24:13PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Following the “if it didn't happen on a mailing list, it didn't
> happen”, I repeat here what I said on IRC:
> 12:26 < kwilk> So I rebuilt src:python-aalib, and I ended up these Depends:
> "python3:any (>= 3.3.2-2~), libaa1".
> 12:27 <
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> 4) Python modules from dpkg are borderline useless for developers. We
> package modules so that apps can use them, not so that people can
> develop with them.
Are they 'borderline useless' because they are normally much older
W dniu śro, wrz 18, 2013 o 10:57 ,nadawca Tshepang Lekhonkhobe
napisał:
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Paul Tagliamonte
wrote:
4) Python modules from dpkg are borderline useless for
developers. We
package modules so that apps can use them, not so that people
can
develop w
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:41:52PM +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> ok, I forgot to add ";)", but...
Sure, but let's be more careful - I don't want people quoting "Debian
Python" people telling people they're going to purge pip from the
archive...
It's all too often I hear people complain about De
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:57:30PM +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > 4) Python modules from dpkg are borderline useless for developers. We
> > package modules so that apps can use them, not so that people can
> > develop w
[Thomas Kluyver, 2013-09-18]
> From a developer point of view: this leaves you dependent on other people
> to get the latest release of your software to users, which can be very
> frustrating. For instance, I'm a developer for IPython: we made a 1.0
> release over a month ago, and there's already b
Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:41:52PM +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>> ok, I forgot to add ";)", but...
>
>Sure, but let's be more careful - I don't want people quoting "Debian
>Python" people telling people they're going to purge pip from the
>archive...
>
>It's all too of
Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:57:30PM +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Paul Tagliamonte
> wrote:
>> > 4) Python modules from dpkg are borderline useless for
>developers. We
>> > package modules so that apps can use them, not so t
Am 19.09.2013 00:36, schrieb Scott Kitterman:
>
>
> Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:41:52PM +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>>> ok, I forgot to add ";)", but...
>>
>> Sure, but let's be more careful - I don't want people quoting "Debian
>> Python" people telling people they'r
Hi Paul,
> I don't understand the pip hate. Why don't you guys try and, you know,
> figure out *why* these tools were invented. It (for sure) is overly
> simplistic, but it's there for a reason.
It's pretty obvious why these tools were invented -- I think everyone
appreciates the difficulties of
On Sep 18, 2013, at 09:36 AM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> 1) pip isn't for global package management, for this is stupid. If we
> disabled root use of pip, I think we'd all be a bit happier.
>
> 4) Python modules from dpkg are borderline useless for developers. We
> package modules so that
Paul Tagliamonte writes:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 03:22:19PM +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>> [W. Martin Borgert, 2013-09-18]
>> > As a passionate pip hater I would go for a Conflicts,
>> > which finally would make pip uninstallable :~)
>> > Next steps: get rid of gem, npm, EPT, ...
>>
>> +1 (un
On Monday, September 16, 2013 23:23:30 Kerrick Staley wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Scott Kitterman
wrote:
> > OK. I think that convinces me it's widely enough spread we ought to fix
> > this for Wheezy. I'll take it up with the release managers as it's their
> > decision, not mine.
28 matches
Mail list logo
