* Mathias Behrle: " [tryton-debian] Bug#783029: Bug#783029: [py3porters-devel] Packaging of suds-jurko" (Wed, 29 Apr 2015 11:46:01 +0200):
> * Lionel Elie Mamane: " Re: [tryton-debian] Bug#783029: [py3porters-devel] > Packaging of suds-jurko" (Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:32:23 +0200): Hi Lionel, hi all, > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 03:27:12PM +0200, Mathias Behrle wrote: > > > * Lionel Elie Mamane: " [tryton-debian] suds in Debian" (Tue, 28 Apr 2015 > > > 13:24:25 +0200): > > > > >> I just uploaded the jurko fork of suds (the latter you are maintainer > > >> of in Debian) to Debian. > > > > > I am quite surprised to hear that. Your package even doesn't seem to > > > close an ITP bug. Could you please provide the link to your > > > packaging sources? > > > > https://people.debian.org/~lmamane/suds/ > > You don't have permission to access /~lmamane/suds/suds-jurko_0.6-2.dsc on > this server. > > > >> The killer feature for me was compatibility with Python 3. It installs > > >> as python module "suds", for drop-in replacement of suds. > > > > > The "killer" feature of suds-jurko those days may turn out to be that it > > > tends to be as unmaintained as the original suds. > > > > <sigh> > > > > >> For now, the Python2 package of suds-jurko provides and conflicts with > > >> python-suds (your package). Let me know whether you think something > > >> more "soft", like e.g. collaborating through update-alternatives, > > >> would be more appropriate. > > > > > Sorry, coordinating before uploading to NEW would have been much more > > > appropriate, (...). > > > > > Before commenting further I would like to hear about your motivations: > > > > My motivation is purely having a working suds for Python3 so that I > > can use stdnum.eu.vat.check_vies in Python3 (see > > https://bugs.debian.org/774948 ). If my work is useful to others, then > > I'm happy to share it, if not I'll keep it is a local package for me. > > > > > - Are you aware of the work in progress at [1]? > > > > No. > > > > > - Are you aware of the planning to prepare suds-jurko as a drop-in > > > replacement for suds with coordinating to migrate also the project at pypi > > > [2][3]? > > > > No. > > > > Since you seem to have good not-too-long-term plans, I'm happy if we > > ask ftpmaster to reject my upload to make way for your plans. > > The current state is: > > - suds (as the original package from fedora) has a dead upstream > - suds-jurko (fork of the original package ported to py3) meanwhile seems to > have a dead (or at least overloaded and unresponsive) upstream, too. > Last release: 2014-01-24 > Last commit: 2014-12-25 > - pysimplesoap[0] seems to be a promising and maintained project. > > > My personal plans are: > > - Wait some weeks (say until end of May), if either there will be some > feedback or some revivification on the project. > - In case the project shows activity from maintainer side I would take it and > do a drop in for current suds. > - In case there will be no activity, I won't step in as the quasi upstream of > suds-jurko. I would inform the rdepends of python-suds to consider the usage > of pysimplesoap. > Indeed, if you still want to take over maintenance of suds-jurko then > under this circumstances I will be happy to inform the rdepends to use > your package and to take off python-suds from the archive. > > I think - provided pysimplesoap qualifies as a replacement for suds and > suds-jurko remains in the current state - it makes more sense to put work > on patches for the rdepends of python-suds to use pysimplesoap than to > introduce another unmaintained package in the archive. At least I personally > don't feel to have the continuing ability and to take the responsibility to > beat another dead horse. If you want then to take over, that's fine for me. > Until that decision I ask you indeed to wait with your package (i.e. to ask > ftp-masters to not consider it for the moment). > > As always I am open to suggests, those are just my current feelings and plans. Time has passed and re-evaluating suds-jurko still shows no maintainer activity. I don't get feedback on mails written directly to Jurko neither there is action on patches or development on the bitbucket project. So my personal decision is to not use suds-jurko as a drop-in for suds. Further action now depends on your answer, Lionel: Do you still want to maintain a suds-jurko package in Debian? Depending on your answer I will add a deprecation warning in the current suds package recommending the use of pysimplesoap (currently in NEW) or (if API compatibility is required) the suds-jurko package. Cheers, Mathias > [0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=782970 -- Mathias Behrle PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0x8405BBF6
pgpZ5LObBZEHX.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP