Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 11:18:50PM -0800, Jim Bublitz wrote: > > My concern with splitting the packages is the possible creation of > dependency problems for third-party developers - eg those people > using PyQt of PyKDE to develop their packages. They should be able > to count on a basic integral PyQt or PyKDE when distributing > *their* packages. I'd prefer to avoid a situation similar to libc > (hypothetically) making the socket functions optional. An app like > eric may not have problems, but database apps (or even apps that > peripherally use databases) will certainly expect qtsql, and apps > that include 3D might expect qtgl. Similar dependencies might exist > with PyKDE. I was going to include extra information about the packages layout in their description, but probably I should at least be consistent with the logical layout of the other components on Debian, i.e.: if Debian's Qt comes with SQL and OpenGL in the same package (currently, it's that way, in the past we had a separate package for -gl), then there's no real gain excluding them from PyQt's one. The same comes for PyKDE, of course. Anyway, I'm getting Qt extensions in a separate package, as even if they come as an option at PyQt package, they depend on elements out of Qt, and would depend and force to install extra element (QScintilla libs, in this case). Thanks Jim. ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt
On 12-Dec-02 Ricardo Javier Cardenes Medina wrote: > I'm even planning to split python-qt3 (which is a huge package) > on several other packages, as not everyone need, say, qtgl, or > qtsql. I appreciate all of those doing packaging enough that I wouldn't tell anyone what to do - this is just my opinion and nothing more. I appreciate that PyQt is large and PyKDE is even larger, however with the -c switch build times have become reasonable, and the amount of HD space the full packages take is not that great. My concern with splitting the packages is the possible creation of dependency problems for third-party developers - eg those people using PyQt of PyKDE to develop their packages. They should be able to count on a basic integral PyQt or PyKDE when distributing *their* packages. I'd prefer to avoid a situation similar to libc (hypothetically) making the socket functions optional. An app like eric may not have problems, but database apps (or even apps that peripherally use databases) will certainly expect qtsql, and apps that include 3D might expect qtgl. Similar dependencies might exist with PyKDE. I realize people can add the missing packages later if needed, but it's just one more missing dependency to satisfy and might also cause version problems, eg PyQt-3.3.2 installed without qtsql now needs qtsql, but only PyQt-3.5 version is easily available. Installing 3.5 might break user's PyQt-3.3.2 code for some obscure reason. It may not be a realistic enough concern to worry about, but it seems worth considering whether it's important or not. Just my 2 cents. Jim ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt
On Wednesday 11 December 2002 08:17 pm, Jack Neal wrote: > I kinda like having everything together, at least as an RPM for my distro > so I don't have to much with makefiles and all that jazz I'm new at > this stuff, and the more installshieldesque something is, the better. > I actually detested install shield. I personally think ./configure; make; make install is a lot easier to use than that. RPMs and Debian packages are the way to go because it is easily scriptable and such. The best part is that I don't have any files in the /usr directory that isn't part of some package. I can ask each file what package they are a part of; given a package, I can track down where to go for more info. This means even a clutz like me can manage a complete linux installation. Heck, I can manage even more. > Is it possible to distribute both ways? I know it takes a lot of time for > someone to put this stuff together; it seems to me if the code is sitting > out there, someone could run with it and package however they pleased. > This is true. With the BSD and GPL type licenses, anyone can do pretty much anything with the code. The questions really is, "I want to make this stuff accessible to everyone; what is the best way to do this?", or really, "Someone's already thought through this - what did you do?" -- Jonathan Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt
On Wednesday 11 December 2002 07:52 pm, Ricardo Javier Cardenes Medina wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:40:17PM -0800, Jonathan Gardner wrote: > > be difficult to seperate Qscintilla into a seperate package, and PyQt's > > qtext as well. While incorporating it into the PyQt package is no > > problem, it just doesn't seem right. > > > > How does the debian package manage this? > > > :-? > > Just translate the following to the .spec equivalents. I think the only > "hard" difference is that Debian dependencies rely on packages _name_, not > on its content: It sounds like you are more familiar with RPMs than I am. I guess I should learn how debian works so I can do my job better... Anyway, I think I understand what you are saying. In order to COMPILE the PyQt RPMs, you need Qt, sip, and QScintilla. In order to INSTALL the PyQt base libraries, all you need is sip and Qt. In order to install the PyQt Qscintilla library (qtext), you need Qscintilla installed as well. The name of this package will be PyQt-qtext. I think I see how to do this. Thanks for the tips. -- Jonathan Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt
Like I said... newbie question had to ask. I figured if they were all in pieces parts anyways, you could redistribute however if you had all the time in the world... Which none of us has. :-) Cheers, Jack - Original Message - From: "Frederick Polgardy Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jack Neal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 11:50 PM Subject: Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt > Is it possible to distribute both ways? I know it takes a lot of time for > someone to put this stuff together; it seems to me if the code is sitting > out there, someone could run with it and package however they pleased. Maybe if you're packaging Hello World. :) Managing something of this magnitude is an incredible task (thanks to you guys for doing it, I don't even *think* of mucking through the real sources most of the time!). If you're just doing an rpm -i anyway, what's the difference between one file and twenty files on the command line? There's no makefile madness either way. -- F R E D E R I C K P O L G A R D Y J R. Bodacion Technologies 18-3 E Dundee Road - Suite 300 - Barrington, IL 60010 Phone: 847/842.9008 - Fax: 847/842-1731 Web: http://www.bodacion.com ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt
> Is it possible to distribute both ways? I know it takes a lot of time for > someone to put this stuff together; it seems to me if the code is sitting > out there, someone could run with it and package however they pleased. Maybe if you're packaging Hello World. :) Managing something of this magnitude is an incredible task (thanks to you guys for doing it, I don't even *think* of mucking through the real sources most of the time!). If you're just doing an rpm -i anyway, what's the difference between one file and twenty files on the command line? There's no makefile madness either way. -- F R E D E R I C K P O L G A R D Y J R. Bodacion Technologies 18-3 E Dundee Road - Suite 300 - Barrington, IL 60010 Phone: 847/842.9008 - Fax: 847/842-1731 Web: http://www.bodacion.com ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt
I kinda like having everything together, at least as an RPM for my distro so I don't have to much with makefiles and all that jazz I'm new at this stuff, and the more installshieldesque something is, the better. Is it possible to distribute both ways? I know it takes a lot of time for someone to put this stuff together; it seems to me if the code is sitting out there, someone could run with it and package however they pleased. Thanks, Jack - Original Message - From: "Ricardo Javier Cardenes Medina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 10:52 PM Subject: Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:40:17PM -0800, Jonathan Gardner wrote: > be difficult to seperate Qscintilla into a seperate package, and PyQt's qtext > as well. While incorporating it into the PyQt package is no problem, it just > doesn't seem right. > > How does the debian package manage this? :-? Just translate the following to the .spec equivalents. I think the only "hard" difference is that Debian dependencies rely on packages _name_, not on its content: Phil ships QScintilla as a separate package, so I packaged it _apart_ from PyQt. At Debian we split packaging information over some files into a debian/ directory, instead of a unique .spec file. There, we have a "control" file that specifies (among other things), "Build-Depends" of the package, so I can tell that I need QScintilla to build PyQt. And again, Phil doesn't make a big module with all PyQt, but has split them, and I exploit this. Into that "control" file we specify too which "binary" packages are generated from the original "source" package, so I currently ship two binary packages: python-qt3, which contains the core PyQt modules and python-qtext (which depends on python-qt3 and libqscintilla0 packages). This way, those who don't want Qt extensions, simply don't install python-qtext, but python-qt3 (or python-qt2, whatever they like). I'm even planning to split python-qt3 (which is a huge package) on several other packages, as not everyone need, say, qtgl, or qtsql. ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
Re: [PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:40:17PM -0800, Jonathan Gardner wrote: > be difficult to seperate Qscintilla into a seperate package, and PyQt's qtext > as well. While incorporating it into the PyQt package is no problem, it just > doesn't seem right. > > How does the debian package manage this? :-? Just translate the following to the .spec equivalents. I think the only "hard" difference is that Debian dependencies rely on packages _name_, not on its content: Phil ships QScintilla as a separate package, so I packaged it _apart_ from PyQt. At Debian we split packaging information over some files into a debian/ directory, instead of a unique .spec file. There, we have a "control" file that specifies (among other things), "Build-Depends" of the package, so I can tell that I need QScintilla to build PyQt. And again, Phil doesn't make a big module with all PyQt, but has split them, and I exploit this. Into that "control" file we specify too which "binary" packages are generated from the original "source" package, so I currently ship two binary packages: python-qt3, which contains the core PyQt modules and python-qtext (which depends on python-qt3 and libqscintilla0 packages). This way, those who don't want Qt extensions, simply don't install python-qtext, but python-qt3 (or python-qt2, whatever they like). I'm even planning to split python-qt3 (which is a huge package) on several other packages, as not everyone need, say, qtgl, or qtsql. ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
[PyKDE] Seperate Qscintilla from PyQt
I am finally getting around to building the PyQt development snapshots so I can play with Eric 3. Having to rebuild PyQt to incorporate Qscintilla, I am thinking it is going to be difficult to seperate Qscintilla into a seperate package, and PyQt's qtext as well. While incorporating it into the PyQt package is no problem, it just doesn't seem right. How does the debian package manage this? Would it make sense to release PyQt qtext seperate from PyQt, perhaps even incorporated into Qscintilla itself? Anyway, after this build of PyQt is finished, I'll be able to play with eric 3. I am getting pretty excited as I realize this moment is drawing really close... -- Jonathan Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ PyKDE mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
