Joining Python Modules Packaging Team
Hello, It has been suggested that I join the Python Modules Packaging Team. I currently am the maintainer of the following packages: django-tables django-filters django-ajax-selects Plus a number of other packages that are not yet available in Debian. My Alioth login is bam. (Yes, I have been told that those package names should be prefixed with python- to be policy compliant - just one of the things that needs fixing) Thanks -- Brian May
Re: python3.3 status
* Scott Kitterman , 2013-06-06, 12:46: Did anyone file bugs for jwilk's FTBFS TODO packages? I've file them all, with one exception: I couldn't reproduce nuitka's FTBFS in a different build environment. -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130606204443.ga8...@jwilk.net
Re: python3.3 status
On 06.06.2013 19:04, Jakub Wilk wrote: > python-scipy FTBFS with new Cython: #707315 and needs fixed numpy. a new upstream which works with new cython is ready in svn. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51b0cb5d.4050...@googlemail.com
Re: python3.3 status
* Scott Kitterman , 2013-06-06, 12:46: mpi4py, pyepr, pystemmer, python-llfuse, python-scipy, and python-astropy all needed a fixed cython, which is now available. pyepr builds successfully, but puts dbg extensions into wrong package: #708011 python-scipy FTBFS with new Cython: #707315 python-astropy needs fixed Numpy mpi4py, pystemmer, python-llfuse are OK -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130606170405.gb6...@jwilk.net
Re: python3.3 status
On Thursday, May 23, 2013 06:19:06 PM Scott Kitterman wrote: > I've been working on this a bit ... > > On Tuesday, May 07, 2013 02:01:26 PM Jakub Wilk wrote: > > python3-defaults maintainer(s?) decided to make python3.3 a supported > > version without prior notice. Yay. Now we have dozens of packages > > failing to build: > > > > boost1.49 FTBFS TODO > > boost1.50 FTBFS TODO > > cairosvg FTBFS, needs fixed py3cairo cssutils - Fixed > > distribute FTBFS TODO > > flufl.bounce FTBFS #707086, needs new zope.interface > > germinate FTBFS, needs fixed python-apt > hivex FTBFS fixed, but still doesn't generate dependencies right #709516 > > libguestfs FTBFS TODO > > mdp FTBFS, needs fixed python-numpy mod-wsgi, Now fixed > > mpi4py needs fixed cython > > nuitka FTBFS TODO > > objgraph FTBFS #686331 > > pyepr needs fixed cython > > pyfits FTBFS, needs fixed python-numpy pymarkups - Fixed > > pyopencl FTBFS, needs fixed boost1.49 > > pyside FTBFS TODO > > pystemmer needs fixed cython pytest - Fixed > > python-apt FTBFS #681744 > > python-astropy needs fixed cython > > python-cffi FTBFS TODO > > python-csb FTBFS TODO > > python-distutils-extra FTBFS needs rebuilt pygobject python-docutils - Fixed python-flexmock - Fixed > > python-llfuse needs fixed cython python-notify2 - Fixed > python-numpy Fixed in experimental + SVN > > python-scipy needs fixed cython, then likely FTBFS #691254 > > python-stem FTBFS TODO > > python-wadllib FTBFS #686332 > > shiboken FTBFS TODO > > yapsy FTBFS TODO > > yp-svipc FTBFS, needs fixed python-numpy zope.interface - Needs update to 4.0.2 or later > > "FTBFS TODO" means that a package fails to build, but there's no bug > > filed yet. I plan to file bugs today or tomorrow, unless there are > > other volunteers to do it. I've updated this list by removing ones that were reported fixed in the last mail I sent and then updating again based on responses to it. mpi4py, pyepr, pystemmer, python-llfuse, python-scipy, and python-astropy all needed a fixed cython, which is now available. It would be nice if someone would check those. Getting zope.interface updated would be helpful as well, but seems to need sponsoring. If someone has some sponsoring cycles available, please have a look. Most of the red in http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/python3.3.html can be binNMUed after python-numpy is uploaded (promised this weekend, AIUI). It would be worth doing some investigation of the unknown packages to see if they are generating dependencies correctly. Any other progress? Did anyone file bugs for jwilk's FTBFS TODO packages? Scott K -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/3082334.MxQK4dTUX1@scott-latitude-e6320
Re: RFS: bunch, kitchen, grapefruit, fabulous, stomper, txws, txzmq, moksha.common, moksha.hub
* Simon Chopin , 2013-06-06, 14:19:
fabulous/fonts/cmr10.ttf license doesn't look free to me.
I've removed all the fonts from the tarball since their license wasn't
specified anyway — I had to go look in other packages to find them. I
guess the FTP masters disagree with you on the license though, as one
can find this font at least in fonts-lyx.
I wouldn't assume that just because something is in main, it's
necessarily blessed by ftp-masters. Two reasons:
1) mistakes happen;
2) not every upload goes through NEW.
I don't see a point of making fabulous-xtermspeedup a separate
package. It's tiny, and doesn't bring any extra dependencies.
Yes, but it's arch:any whereas the rest is arch:all.
That would be a valid reason to keep them separated _if_ the arch:all
package were big. But it's tiny, too.
The package FTBFS when I build only arch-dependent packages:
|dh_sphinxdoc -a
| dh_sphinxdoc: Sphinx documentation not found
| make: *** [binary-arch] Error 2
Shouldn't dh_sphinxdoc -a be a NOP?
In general case, no: it's possible that the documentation is included in
an arch:any package.
In this case: maybe. Here's an excerpt from #debian-mentors from a few
days ago on this subject:
< helmut> jwilk: while working on doxygen, a question on --with
sphinxdoc appeared. maybe you have an answer: as far as I can see the
sequence causes dh_sphinxdoc to be executed on all builds, but it fails
when it does not find any sphinx documentation. does this work when the
docs reside in arch:all packages and building arch-only?
[...]
< jwilk> helmut: It doesn't.
[...]
< jwilk> The alternative is to do nothing if you don't find docs. (I'm
not saying I like this idea.)
< jwilk> Oh, and at some point I was considering doing this:
http://paste.debian.net/6076
< jwilk> But since nobody bothered to file a bug about the current
behavior so far, I'm assuming that people are mostly content with it. :P
(The paste has expired since then, so I attached the patch I had in
mind.)
If I were the maintainer, I would remove (with a Debian-specific
patch) this junk from setup.py:
| from ez_setup import use_setuptools
| use_setuptools(version='0.6c11')
I always thought this was only a convoluted way to check for the
version and never bothered to actually look at ez_setup. Now I
understand why you'd remove it, and will do the same from now on.
You could drop the "The information above should ..." part from the
patch header. :)
lintian4python emits (among others):
x: python-fabulous: except-without-exception-type
usr/share/pyshared/fabulous/logs.py:86
x: python-fabulous: except-without-exception-type
usr/share/pyshared/fabulous/utils.py:95
x: python-fabulous: except-without-exception-type
usr/share/pyshared/fabulous/xterm256.py:104
Patched and reported upstream.
Now it emits:
e: python-fabulous: except-shadows-builtin
usr/share/pyshared/fabulous/xterm256.py:104: AssertionError
--
Jakub Wilk
Index: debian/control
===
--- debian/control (revision 18535)
+++ debian/control (working copy)
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
${sphinxdoc:Depends}, libjs-sphinxdoc (= ${source:Version})
Recommends: python (>= 2.6) | python-simplejson, python-imaging
Suggests: jsmath
+Breaks: debhelper (<< 7.3.16~)
Description: tool for producing documentation for Python projects
Sphinx is a tool for producing documentation for Python projects, using
reStructuredText as markup language.
Index: debian/changelog
===
--- debian/changelog (revision 18552)
+++ debian/changelog (working copy)
@@ -2,8 +2,11 @@
* Export PYTHONWARNINGS=d in debian/rules to enable all warnings in Python
code.
+ * dh_sphinxdoc: when run via the dh addon and acting on a strict subset of
+all binary packages, don't fail if no documentation was found.
++ This feature requires debhelper 7.3.16, add Breaks for older versions.
- -- Jakub Wilk Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:48:37 +0200
+ -- Jakub Wilk Sat, 17 Sep 2011 14:07:34 +0200
sphinx (1.0.7+dfsg-2) unstable; urgency=low
Index: debian/dh-sphinxdoc/dh_sphinxdoc
===
--- debian/dh-sphinxdoc/dh_sphinxdoc (revision 18535)
+++ debian/dh-sphinxdoc/dh_sphinxdoc (working copy)
@@ -306,8 +306,11 @@
return 1;
}
-init();
+init(options => { "dh" => \$dh{FLAG_DH} });
+my $all_packages = @{$dh{DOPACKAGES}} == getpackages();
+my $mercy_mode = $dh{FLAG_DH} && $all_packages;
+
load_packaged_js();
my @paths = @ARGV;
@@ -340,7 +343,7 @@
}, $pkgpath);
}
}
-if ($done == 0)
+if ($done == 0 and not $mercy_mode)
{
my $message = 'Sphinx documentation not found';
$message .= " at $path" if defined $path;
Index: debian/dh-sphinxdoc/sphinxdoc.pm
===
--- debian/dh-sphinxdoc/sphinxdoc.pm (revision 1
Re: RFS: bunch, kitchen, grapefruit, fabulous, stomper, txws, txzmq, moksha.common, moksha.hub
Quoting Jakub Wilk (2013-05-08 12:29:58)
> * Simon Chopin , 2013-05-07, 20:04:
> >(or RFR, for Jakub :P)
>
> Oh hi!
>
> >fabulous: Makes your terminal output totally fabulous
>
> fabulous/fonts/cmr10.ttf license doesn't look free to me.
I've removed all the fonts from the tarball since their license wasn't
specified anyway — I had to go look in other packages to find them.
I guess the FTP masters disagree with you on the license though, as one
can find this font at least in fonts-lyx.
>
> I see this in debian/patches/build_xterm256_ext:
> -library = expanduser('~/.xterm256.so')
> +library = '/usr/share/lib/xtermspeedup.so'
> Errr, /usr/share/lib/?
Ooops. Fixed
>
> I don't see a point of making fabulous-xtermspeedup a separate package.
> It's tiny, and doesn't bring any extra dependencies.
Yes, but it's arch:any whereas the rest is arch:all.
> The package FTBFS when I build only arch-dependent packages:
> |dh_sphinxdoc -a
> | dh_sphinxdoc: Sphinx documentation not found
> | make: *** [binary-arch] Error 2
Shouldn't dh_sphinxdoc -a be a NOP?
>
> If I were the maintainer, I would remove (with a Debian-specific patch)
> this junk from setup.py:
> | from ez_setup import use_setuptools
> | use_setuptools(version='0.6c11')
I always thought this was only a convoluted way to check for the version
and never bothered to actually look at ez_setup. Now I understand why
you'd remove it, and will do the same from now on.
>
> lintian4python emits (among others):
> x: python-fabulous: except-without-exception-type
> usr/share/pyshared/fabulous/logs.py:86
> x: python-fabulous: except-without-exception-type
> usr/share/pyshared/fabulous/utils.py:95
> x: python-fabulous: except-without-exception-type
> usr/share/pyshared/fabulous/xterm256.py:104
Patched and reported upstream.
Cheers,
Simon
signature.asc
Description: signature
RFS: python3-sympy
Please can someone upload the new package python3-sympy Package name : python3-sympy Version : 0.7.2-2 URL : http://sympy.org/ Binary packages: python3-sympy It's already in the team svn: svn://svn.debian.org/python-modules/packages/python3-sympy/trunk/ >From a previous discussion, it's OK to have separate source for this, because upstream doesn't support building Python 2 and 3 packages from the same release tarball: http://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2012/10/msg00041.html Thanks, Thomas
