On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 14:07:18 +0200 =?UTF-8?B?SmVyZW15IExhaW7DqQ==?= <jeremy.la...@m4x.org> wrote: > I think the transition to pypdf2 was handled rather poorly.
This issue manage to make the way up in my ToDo list this week, after way too much time. I'm sorry for the long delay. Since I'm a bit out-of-sync here, I will like to know if I missing something here. I mean, the transition didn't happen yet, so there is still time to do it correctly, right? Some clarifications: - The python-pypdf packages did not migrated to PyPDF2. PyPDF2 is a fully independent package: python-pypdf2. Maybe I'm understanding something wrong, I don't know what Elena means with https://bugs.debian.org/749321#15 - pypdf and pypdf2 are fully compatible API wise. They are imported as pyPdf and PyPDF2 respectably. - I submitted bugs against the reversed dependencies (Oct 2014). This still look pending: bookletimposer: #763974 kraft: #763980 pdfshuffle: #763973 pisa: #763981 w3af: #763975 I see two possible ways here: 1. Follow the Jeremy's advice: Upload a dummy python-pypdf, which will depend on python-pypdf2 and expose the pypdf2 interface. 2. NMU the revers dependencies to import PyPDF2 in them, since not much action was taken from the maintainers in the last months. > The module > name is different, so I would expect a python-pypdf2 package instead of > a misleading python-pypdf .. which does not contain a "pypdf" module. I don't getting your comment here. python-pypdf contains the module pyPdf. Cheers, luciano -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
