Hi Paul (2021.02.25_08:58:36_+0000) > > Including a python3-full and python3.x-full packages, that Depends on > > the entire stdlib, is a compromise position to help them to support > > Python users on Debian (and derivative) platforms. > > This is the piece we're missing. What is it in Debian that makes this > support difficult?
Beginner Python developers install "python" on their machine, and then get surprised when some standard library modules fail to import. The examples we've seen are most commonly distutils, venv, and lib2to3 (used by tools like black, apparently). The existence of "python3-full" doesn't immediately change this situation. But it does give people providing support a simple instruction to give the users. What they really would have liked is a "python" package that installs the full python developer environment, not the more minimal python that Debian packages need. But that's a *huge* change that would take multiple releases to achieve. I don't think the Debian Python community has the will to do that. This as an entirely political change. It's a peace offering, to try to improve communication with the grumpier parts of the upstream community. If we respond to their concerns, we can hope that they will bring them to us sooner, in the future. > Why do we need to rush this into bullseye now? Because this blew in up late Jan, and bullseye is the next release after that. We didn't rush to get it in before the freeze, to be sure that the Debian Python community was on board, and the upstream community agreed with the details. We have explained that bullseye was going into freeze, and making this change now may be difficult. So not forcing your hand, here. Feel free to reject it. It will come back to the Stable Release Team for .1, though. > Also, that message 00035 mentions two items that were considered as too > disruptive. Does fixing only the third item really warrant the upload > now, considering it seems to hint that you'll want to rename things > again after the release: > """ > - It was requested that we differentiate between "system" Python and > what upstream considers core Python. A package rename (e.g. python3 -> > python3-system) will confuse everyone and take multiple releases to > implement, and cannot be targeted until bookworm at the earliest. > """ As above, I think that change is a *huge* transition, that I don't think we have the will to push for in Debian. So, I wouldn't count on it happening. We're hoping to have a cross-distro Python packaging discussion at the next PyCon. That may push us towards wanting to take changes like that. But it'll still need people within Debian to drive it. Small steps. Hopefully they make things better. SR -- Stefano Rivera http://tumbleweed.org.za/ +1 415 683 3272
