Re: Python 3 transition question

2019-09-04 Thread Martin Kelly

On 9/2/19 1:18 PM, Martin Kelly wrote:

On 9/1/19 10:07 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:



On September 2, 2019 4:00:53 AM UTC, Sandro Tosi  
wrote:

I would just stop building these.  And if the reverse dependencies

have a

py2removal bug itself, then comment in these issues that the
suggested/recommended package gets removed.  If they don't have a

py2removal

bug, please file the bugs for these packages.


i dont believe this is a sensible approach; for example i maintain
python-mpmath, that would be rendered uninstallable the moment
python-gmp2 is removed. Now, python-mpmath has 3 external
reverse-dependencies (just to name a couple, sagemath and simpy) that
would be then uninstallable, and so on and so forth for all their
rdeps.

Martin, i think for now the only option is to keep the py2 packages
around until we're ready to drop them (ie they have 0 rdeps).


I just checked on packages.d.o and according to it, python-gmp2 is a 
Suggests.  Suggests aren't installed with packages.  Unless I'm 
missing something, python-mpmath wouldn't become uninstallable.


IIRC, policy doesn't even require Suggests packages to exist.

I agree about keeping packages as long as they have reverse 
Recommends, but I think Suggests is going too far (although AIUI, 
missing Recommends don't make the package uninstallable either).


Scott K



If I'm summarizing correctly, it sounds like there is no policy on 
exactly what to do here. I think removing the package would be pretty 
bad, because gmpy is designed to speed up numerical libraries, and the 
performance hit without it would make many libraries really painful to 
use. Given this, perhaps the dependencies should be Recommends instead 
of Suggests.


The guidelines I saw in the bugs filed on my packages (e.g. bug #937791) 
say to "document" the reverse dependency. Where do I document this?


(ping). I'd like to resolve the bugs I have on my packages and am not 
sure yet how best to proceed.




Re: Python 3 transition question

2019-09-02 Thread Martin Kelly

On 9/1/19 10:07 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:



On September 2, 2019 4:00:53 AM UTC, Sandro Tosi  wrote:

I would just stop building these.  And if the reverse dependencies

have a

py2removal bug itself, then comment in these issues that the
suggested/recommended package gets removed.  If they don't have a

py2removal

bug, please file the bugs for these packages.


i dont believe this is a sensible approach; for example i maintain
python-mpmath, that would be rendered uninstallable the moment
python-gmp2 is removed. Now, python-mpmath has 3 external
reverse-dependencies (just to name a couple, sagemath and simpy) that
would be then uninstallable, and so on and so forth for all their
rdeps.

Martin, i think for now the only option is to keep the py2 packages
around until we're ready to drop them (ie they have 0 rdeps).


I just checked on packages.d.o and according to it, python-gmp2 is a Suggests.  
Suggests aren't installed with packages.  Unless I'm missing something, 
python-mpmath wouldn't become uninstallable.

IIRC, policy doesn't even require Suggests packages to exist.

I agree about keeping packages as long as they have reverse Recommends, but I 
think Suggests is going too far (although AIUI, missing Recommends don't make 
the package uninstallable either).

Scott K



If I'm summarizing correctly, it sounds like there is no policy on 
exactly what to do here. I think removing the package would be pretty 
bad, because gmpy is designed to speed up numerical libraries, and the 
performance hit without it would make many libraries really painful to 
use. Given this, perhaps the dependencies should be Recommends instead 
of Suggests.


The guidelines I saw in the bugs filed on my packages (e.g. bug #937791) 
say to "document" the reverse dependency. Where do I document this?




Re: Help with setuptools-related build break

2019-01-27 Thread Martin Kelly

On 1/26/19 4:56 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:

On Saturday, January 26, 2019 04:05:50 PM Martin Kelly wrote:

Hi,

I'm attempting to release a new version of my package python-gmpy2 [1]
and am hitting a bug that I can't figure out how to resolve.
Specifically, in the latest version under pbuilder, python-setuptools is
missing. When I add python-setuptools and python3-setuptools it to the
build dependencies, I get the following error:

Err http://cdn-fastly.deb.debian.org/debian sid/main amd64
python-pkg-resources all 39.2.0-1
404  Not Found [IP: 151.101.52.204 80]
Err http://cdn-fastly.deb.debian.org/debian sid/main amd64
python-setuptools all 39.2.0-1
404  Not Found [IP: 151.101.52.204 80]
Err http://cdn-fastly.deb.debian.org/debian sid/main amd64
python3-setuptools all 39.2.0-1
404  Not Found [IP: 151.101.52.204 80]
E: Failed to fetch
http://cdn-fastly.deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/p/python-setuptools/python
-pkg-resources_39.2.0-1_all.deb: 404  Not Found [IP: 151.101.52.204 80]
E: Unable to fetch some packages; try '-o APT::Get::Fix-Missing=true' to
continue with missing packages

[snip]

E: pbuilder-satisfydepends failed.

Indeed, this package version does not exist in the repo, so I'm not sure
why apt is attempting to install it.

Does anyone have some guidance and/or debugging suggestions?

Thanks,
Martin

[1] https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/modules/python-gmpy2


Those are obsolete versions.  You need to run pbuilder update.

Scott K



Thanks, this is what I thought as well, and so I kept running pbuilder 
update to no avail. I realized that I was using cowbuilder, so the 
update was happening on a different chroot. After starting from a clean 
cowbuilder, the problem is gone.




Help with setuptools-related build break

2019-01-26 Thread Martin Kelly

Hi,

I'm attempting to release a new version of my package python-gmpy2 [1] 
and am hitting a bug that I can't figure out how to resolve. 
Specifically, in the latest version under pbuilder, python-setuptools is 
missing. When I add python-setuptools and python3-setuptools it to the 
build dependencies, I get the following error:


Err http://cdn-fastly.deb.debian.org/debian sid/main amd64 
python-pkg-resources all 39.2.0-1

  404  Not Found [IP: 151.101.52.204 80]
Err http://cdn-fastly.deb.debian.org/debian sid/main amd64 
python-setuptools all 39.2.0-1

  404  Not Found [IP: 151.101.52.204 80]
Err http://cdn-fastly.deb.debian.org/debian sid/main amd64 
python3-setuptools all 39.2.0-1

  404  Not Found [IP: 151.101.52.204 80]
E: Failed to fetch 
http://cdn-fastly.deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/p/python-setuptools/python-pkg-resources_39.2.0-1_all.deb: 
404  Not Found [IP: 151.101.52.204 80]
E: Unable to fetch some packages; try '-o APT::Get::Fix-Missing=true' to 
continue with missing packages


[snip]

E: pbuilder-satisfydepends failed.

Indeed, this package version does not exist in the repo, so I'm not sure 
why apt is attempting to install it.


Does anyone have some guidance and/or debugging suggestions?

Thanks,
Martin

[1] https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/modules/python-gmpy2



Request to join the Python Modules team

2018-07-14 Thread Martin Kelly

Hi,

I would like to join the Salsa Python Modules team in order to continue 
maintaining my package python-gmpy2. I previously had Alioth access and 
have finally had time to migrate to Salsa.


My Salsa login is aomighty-guest.

I have attempted to read and accept the Python Modules policy 
(https://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/python-modules-policy.html), 
as stated in https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/PythonModulesTeam/HowToJoin, 
but the link is dead.


Thanks,
Martin



Re: Request to join Python Modules Team

2009-10-15 Thread Martin Kelly

if you've read our policy, then yes, you're DPMT member now :-)

[1] http://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/python-modules-policy.html


Yes, I've read it. Do I need to submit my packages to the subversion 
repository or do I just keep maintaining them like I have in the past?


Thanks,
Martin


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Request to join Python Modules Team

2009-10-11 Thread Martin Kelly
Hi, I have been the maintainer of pyecm and python-gmpy for several 
years now and have thought it would be a good idea to maintain these 
packages within the Python Modules Team. Therefore, I request to join 
it. Note that I am not a Debian developer and therefore do not have an 
Alioth login.


Thanks,
Martin Kelly


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Re: Request to join Python Modules Team

2009-10-11 Thread Martin Kelly

You can register on alioth even if you're not a DD: your login name
will have '-guest' suffix, but that's all. Having an alioth user is a
precondition to join any team (so this included).

Thanks. I registered and my Alioth login is mkelly-guest. Is that all I 
need to join?


Martn


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org