Re: [Sugar-devel] Multiversion Packages of toolkit.

[ANIKET MATHUR]

Yes, Agreed. It would not be good if we configure the toolkit for only one
version of Python.
May we change our configure.ac as gyoto and dbus-python and then try?

Thanks!

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 12:18 PM ANIKET MATHUR  wrote:

> Thanks for reminding.
>
> That's what I have got to track progress
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931666
>
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 12:15 PM James Cameron  wrote:
>
>> Debian's bug tracking system should send you a bug number by e-mail.
>>
>> Without that number, few others will be able to see progress or
>> outcome.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 08:40:17AM +0530, ANIKET MATHUR wrote:
>> > Reported the problem as a bug to Debian using the reportbug program.
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 8:22 PM ANIKET MATHUR <[1]amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Sent the email to [2]debian-de...@lists.debian.org as well.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 4:13 PM ANIKET MATHUR <[3]
>> amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > Sent an email to the Debian user mailing list [4]
>> > debian-u...@lists.debian.org requesting for packaging v0.114.
>> >
>> > Packaging of Sugar-toolkit-gtk3 (sugar3) v0.114.
>> >
>> > [profile_ma]
>> > ANIKET MATHUR <[5]4:10 PM (2 minutes
>> > amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in>ago)
>>  [cleardot]
>> >
>> [cleardot]
>> > to debian-user
>> > [cleardot]
>> > G'day,
>> > Aniket Mathur this side, an active contributor of Sugarlabs as
>> well as
>> > a GSoC 19 participant. This mail is a small query regarding the
>> > packaging of "sugar3" module.
>> >
>> > We currently have v0.112 packaged. In the latest version (0.114)
>> > Sugarlabs have made the toolkit compatible with both Python and
>> Python
>> > 3. But we don't have Debian multi-version packages for the
>> latest
>> > version. This prevents us to scale our testing as well as
>> limits the
>> > number of testers.
>> >
>> > We don't know how to make multi-version local packages, that we
>> can
>> > distribute for testing.
>> >
>> > It would be good if we have Debian packages for v 0.114.
>> >
>> > Need Help.
>> > Regards.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 12:02 PM ANIKET MATHUR <[6]
>> amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> > Yes, I was asking about Debian packages. Sorry for
>> incomplete
>> > information.
>> >
>> > I read sources of some Debian packages:-
>> > ~ They do use six for keeping multi-version compatibility.
>> > ~ Instead of a [7]configure.ac, they use setup.py.
>> > ~ In setup.py, they define entry-points as per the commands
>> from
>> > the command line specifying python-foo or python3-foo.
>> >
>> > I also did a github search for 'python [8]configure.ac' ,
>> looked
>> > into a considerable amount of commits of different users and
>> > organizations with the motive of "why don't we ask for help
>> from
>> > those who seems to be successful in doing it".
>> >
>> > From my research, I found out that the guys at "balabit"
>> seems to
>> > be able to do it.
>> > I opened an [9]issue asking for help and clearance.
>> >
>> > The next step is to contact the Debian developers.
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 5:21 AM James Cameron <[10]
>> qu...@laptop.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > You neglected to mention that you are asking about
>> Debian and
>> > Ubuntu
>> > binary packages.  Ubuntu packages come from Debian
>> unchanged,
>> > so your
>> > question can be reduced to Debian packaging.
>> >
>> > We're the wrong people to ask.  It's not a skill any of
>> us at
>> > Sugar
>> > Labs have, otherwise we would have done it by now.
>> >
>> > The people who know how to do this are Debian and Ubuntu
>> > package
>> > developers.
>> >
>> > I've tried asking one of the Debian developers but they
>> were
>> > too busy
>> > to give private assistance.  Private assistance does
>> not scale,
>> > so the
>> > return on investment is meagre.
>> >
>> > I suggest you try these things;
>> >
>> > 1.  write a throw-away script to download all Debian
>> packages
>> > that
>> > depend on Python 2 or Python 3, intersect a union of
>> source
>> > packages
>> > that support both versions, and then list those
>> packages that
>> > contain
>> > [11]configure.a

Re: [Sugar-devel] Multiversion Packages of toolkit.

[ANIKET MATHUR]

Thanks for reminding.

That's what I have got to track progress
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931666

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 12:15 PM James Cameron  wrote:

> Debian's bug tracking system should send you a bug number by e-mail.
>
> Without that number, few others will be able to see progress or
> outcome.
>
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 08:40:17AM +0530, ANIKET MATHUR wrote:
> > Reported the problem as a bug to Debian using the reportbug program.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 8:22 PM ANIKET MATHUR <[1]amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in>
> wrote:
> >
> > Sent the email to [2]debian-de...@lists.debian.org as well.
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 4:13 PM ANIKET MATHUR <[3]
> amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Sent an email to the Debian user mailing list [4]
> > debian-u...@lists.debian.org requesting for packaging v0.114.
> >
> > Packaging of Sugar-toolkit-gtk3 (sugar3) v0.114.
> >
> > [profile_ma]
> > ANIKET MATHUR <[5]4:10 PM (2 minutes
> > amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in>ago)
>  [cleardot]
> >
> [cleardot]
> > to debian-user
> > [cleardot]
> > G'day,
> > Aniket Mathur this side, an active contributor of Sugarlabs as
> well as
> > a GSoC 19 participant. This mail is a small query regarding the
> > packaging of "sugar3" module.
> >
> > We currently have v0.112 packaged. In the latest version (0.114)
> > Sugarlabs have made the toolkit compatible with both Python and
> Python
> > 3. But we don't have Debian multi-version packages for the latest
> > version. This prevents us to scale our testing as well as limits
> the
> > number of testers.
> >
> > We don't know how to make multi-version local packages, that we
> can
> > distribute for testing.
> >
> > It would be good if we have Debian packages for v 0.114.
> >
> > Need Help.
> > Regards.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 12:02 PM ANIKET MATHUR <[6]
> amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in
> > > wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I was asking about Debian packages. Sorry for incomplete
> > information.
> >
> > I read sources of some Debian packages:-
> > ~ They do use six for keeping multi-version compatibility.
> > ~ Instead of a [7]configure.ac, they use setup.py.
> > ~ In setup.py, they define entry-points as per the commands
> from
> > the command line specifying python-foo or python3-foo.
> >
> > I also did a github search for 'python [8]configure.ac' ,
> looked
> > into a considerable amount of commits of different users and
> > organizations with the motive of "why don't we ask for help
> from
> > those who seems to be successful in doing it".
> >
> > From my research, I found out that the guys at "balabit"
> seems to
> > be able to do it.
> > I opened an [9]issue asking for help and clearance.
> >
> > The next step is to contact the Debian developers.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 5:21 AM James Cameron <[10]
> qu...@laptop.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > You neglected to mention that you are asking about
> Debian and
> > Ubuntu
> > binary packages.  Ubuntu packages come from Debian
> unchanged,
> > so your
> > question can be reduced to Debian packaging.
> >
> > We're the wrong people to ask.  It's not a skill any of
> us at
> > Sugar
> > Labs have, otherwise we would have done it by now.
> >
> > The people who know how to do this are Debian and Ubuntu
> > package
> > developers.
> >
> > I've tried asking one of the Debian developers but they
> were
> > too busy
> > to give private assistance.  Private assistance does not
> scale,
> > so the
> > return on investment is meagre.
> >
> > I suggest you try these things;
> >
> > 1.  write a throw-away script to download all Debian
> packages
> > that
> > depend on Python 2 or Python 3, intersect a union of
> source
> > packages
> > that support both versions, and then list those packages
> that
> > contain
> > [11]configure.ac in the source package,
> >
> > 2.  review those Debian and Ubuntu source packages that
> are
> > used to
> > generate binary packages for both Python 2 and Python 3,
> and
> > list the
> > package design patterns that you observe,
> >
> > 3.  contact the Debian developers u

Re: [Sugar-devel] Multiversion Packages of toolkit.

[James Cameron]

Debian's bug tracking system should send you a bug number by e-mail.

Without that number, few others will be able to see progress or
outcome.

On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 08:40:17AM +0530, ANIKET MATHUR wrote:
> Reported the problem as a bug to Debian using the reportbug program.
> 
> Thanks! 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 8:22 PM ANIKET MATHUR <[1]amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in> wrote:
> 
> Sent the email to [2]debian-de...@lists.debian.org as well.
> 
> On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 4:13 PM ANIKET MATHUR <[3]amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in>
> wrote:
> 
> Sent an email to the Debian user mailing list [4]
> debian-u...@lists.debian.org requesting for packaging v0.114.
> 
> Packaging of Sugar-toolkit-gtk3 (sugar3) v0.114.
> 
> [profile_ma]
> ANIKET MATHUR <[5]4:10 PM (2 minutes
> amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in>ago)   
> [cleardot]
>  
> [cleardot]
> to debian-user
> [cleardot]
> G'day,
> Aniket Mathur this side, an active contributor of Sugarlabs as well as
> a GSoC 19 participant. This mail is a small query regarding the
> packaging of "sugar3" module.
> 
> We currently have v0.112 packaged. In the latest version (0.114)
> Sugarlabs have made the toolkit compatible with both Python and Python
> 3. But we don't have Debian multi-version packages for the latest
> version. This prevents us to scale our testing as well as limits the
> number of testers.
> 
> We don't know how to make multi-version local packages, that we can
> distribute for testing.
> 
> It would be good if we have Debian packages for v 0.114.
> 
> Need Help.
> Regards.
> 
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 12:02 PM ANIKET MATHUR 
> <[6]amat...@ec.iitr.ac.in
> > wrote:
> 
> Yes, I was asking about Debian packages. Sorry for incomplete
> information.
> 
> I read sources of some Debian packages:-
> ~ They do use six for keeping multi-version compatibility.
> ~ Instead of a [7]configure.ac, they use setup.py.
> ~ In setup.py, they define entry-points as per the commands from
> the command line specifying python-foo or python3-foo.
> 
> I also did a github search for 'python [8]configure.ac' , looked
> into a considerable amount of commits of different users and
> organizations with the motive of "why don't we ask for help from
> those who seems to be successful in doing it".
> 
> From my research, I found out that the guys at "balabit" seems to
> be able to do it.
> I opened an [9]issue asking for help and clearance.
> 
> The next step is to contact the Debian developers.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 5:21 AM James Cameron 
> <[10]qu...@laptop.org>
> wrote:
> 
> You neglected to mention that you are asking about Debian and
> Ubuntu
> binary packages.  Ubuntu packages come from Debian unchanged,
> so your
> question can be reduced to Debian packaging.
> 
> We're the wrong people to ask.  It's not a skill any of us at
> Sugar
> Labs have, otherwise we would have done it by now.
> 
> The people who know how to do this are Debian and Ubuntu
> package
> developers.
> 
> I've tried asking one of the Debian developers but they were
> too busy
> to give private assistance.  Private assistance does not 
> scale,
> so the
> return on investment is meagre.
> 
> I suggest you try these things;
> 
> 1.  write a throw-away script to download all Debian packages
> that
> depend on Python 2 or Python 3, intersect a union of source
> packages
> that support both versions, and then list those packages that
> contain
> [11]configure.ac in the source package,
> 
> 2.  review those Debian and Ubuntu source packages that are
> used to
> generate binary packages for both Python 2 and Python 3, and
> list the
> package design patterns that you observe,
> 
> 3.  contact the Debian developers using their mailing lists, 
> or
> other
> methods,
> 
> 4.  engage in the Debian project by reporting a bug that asks
> for
> packaging of a new version of the toolkit; currently 0.112 is
> packaged.
> 
> On S

Re: [Sugar-devel] Multiversion Packages of toolkit.

[James Cameron]

James Cameron  wrote:
> 1.  write a throw-away script to download all Debian packages
> that depend on Python 2 or Python 3, intersect a union of source
> packages that support both versions, and then list those
> packages that contain configure.ac in the source package,
> 
> 2.  review those Debian and Ubuntu source packages that are used
> to generate binary packages for both Python 2 and Python 3, and
> list the package design patterns that you observe,

When I did this today, I looked through 695 packages.

Those that looked interesting were dbus-python and gyoto.  Both
generate Python 2 and Python 3 binary packages from a single source,
and use configure.ac method of source configuration.

Less interesting but worthy of learning from were libbytesize, mock,
openvswitch, and protobuf.

Another option we have is to change something in the toolkit
configure.ac for the next release, but I don't know what would be
best.  What we have now in 0.114 works for both ambient Python
versions.

A foreseeable failure is for the toolkit to be configured and
installed for only one Python version.  Result will be that a subset
of activity packages either can't be built, or won't run.

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Multiversion Packages of toolkit.

[ANIKET MATHUR]

Reported the problem as a bug to Debian using the reportbug program.

Thanks!

On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 8:22 PM ANIKET MATHUR  wrote:

> Sent the email to debian-de...@lists.debian.org as well.
>
> On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 4:13 PM ANIKET MATHUR 
> wrote:
>
>> Sent an email to the Debian user mailing list
>> debian-u...@lists.debian.org requesting for packaging v0.114.
>>
>> Packaging of Sugar-toolkit-gtk3 (sugar3) v0.114.
>> ANIKET MATHUR 
>> 4:10 PM (2 minutes ago)
>> to debian-user
>> G'day,
>> Aniket Mathur this side, an active contributor of Sugarlabs as well as a
>> GSoC 19 participant. This mail is a small query regarding the packaging of
>> "sugar3" module.
>>
>> We currently have v0.112 packaged. In the latest version (0.114)
>> Sugarlabs have made the toolkit compatible with both Python and Python 3.
>> But we don't have Debian multi-version packages for the latest version.
>> This prevents us to scale our testing as well as limits the number of
>> testers.
>>
>> We don't know how to make multi-version local packages, that we can
>> distribute for testing.
>>
>> It would be good if we have Debian packages for v 0.114.
>>
>> Need Help.
>> Regards.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 12:02 PM ANIKET MATHUR 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, I was asking about Debian packages. Sorry for incomplete
>>> information.
>>>
>>> I read sources of some Debian packages:-
>>> ~ They do use six for keeping multi-version compatibility.
>>> ~ Instead of a configure.ac, they use setup.py.
>>> ~ In setup.py, they define entry-points as per the commands from the
>>> command line specifying python-foo or python3-foo.
>>>
>>> I also did a github search for 'python configure.ac' , looked into a
>>> considerable amount of commits of different users and organizations with
>>> the motive of "why don't we ask for help from those who seems to be
>>> successful in doing it".
>>>
>>> From my research, I found out that the guys at "balabit" seems to be
>>> able to do it.
>>> I opened an issue  asking
>>> for help and clearance.
>>>
>>> The next step is to contact the Debian developers.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 5:21 AM James Cameron  wrote:
>>>
 You neglected to mention that you are asking about Debian and Ubuntu
 binary packages.  Ubuntu packages come from Debian unchanged, so your
 question can be reduced to Debian packaging.

 We're the wrong people to ask.  It's not a skill any of us at Sugar
 Labs have, otherwise we would have done it by now.

 The people who know how to do this are Debian and Ubuntu package
 developers.

 I've tried asking one of the Debian developers but they were too busy
 to give private assistance.  Private assistance does not scale, so the
 return on investment is meagre.

 I suggest you try these things;

 1.  write a throw-away script to download all Debian packages that
 depend on Python 2 or Python 3, intersect a union of source packages
 that support both versions, and then list those packages that contain
 configure.ac in the source package,

 2.  review those Debian and Ubuntu source packages that are used to
 generate binary packages for both Python 2 and Python 3, and list the
 package design patterns that you observe,

 3.  contact the Debian developers using their mailing lists, or other
 methods,

 4.  engage in the Debian project by reporting a bug that asks for
 packaging of a new version of the toolkit; currently 0.112 is
 packaged.

 On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 02:32:33PM +0530, ANIKET MATHUR wrote:
 > Hello everyone,
 >
 > I have been working on developing multi-version packages for toolkit
 which can
 > build for both Python and Python 3. I successfully build packages for
 python,
 > but not able to yet built one's having multi-version support. I have
 been
 > working on this for some time in the last two weeks, trying to get
 something
 > from the source code of existing tools that have these packages, like
 'pip' and
 > a lot more.
 >
 > I need help and suggestions in this work. :-)
 >
 > Thanks!

 > ___
 > Sugar-devel mailing list
 > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
 > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel


 --
 James Cameron
 http://quozl.netrek.org/
 ___
 Sugar-devel mailing list
 Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
 http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

>>>
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

[Sugar-devel] Updates Regarding TelepathyGLib project

[ANIKET MATHUR]

We have completed the TelepathyGlib port of sugar, sugar-toolkit-gtk3,
collabwrapper, as well as of most of the other sugar activities.

Basic collaboration is working with TelepathyGLib.

Although there are a couple of issues with collaboration that we had
earlier with the static telepathy-python bindings as well, which are
encountered and recognised while porting.
https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/issues/840
https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/issues/842

Regards,
Aniket
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] GSoC meeting log

[Devin Ulibarri]

On Mon, 2019-07-08 at 13:24 -0400, Walter Bender wrote:
> Please see http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/meetings/2019-
> 07-08T16:32:13
I am sorry that I missed the meeting, but I read the logs -- thank you.
I also read http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/meetings/2019-07
-08T16:32:13 -- thank you, Favour!
Devin___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

[Sugar-devel] GSoC meeting log

[Walter Bender]

Please see
http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/meetings/2019-07-08T16:32:13

regards.

-walter

-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org

___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel