On 08/15/2014 12:28 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Quoting Thomas Goirand (2014-08-14 09:26:05)
Note that the XStatic python modules aren't just meta packages, they
also offer a mechanism for a Python script to discover where to find a
given static file in the system (which really, isn't
Quoting Thomas Goirand (2014-08-15 09:26:20)
On 08/15/2014 12:28 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Quoting Thomas Goirand (2014-08-14 09:26:05)
Note that the XStatic python modules aren't just meta packages, they
also offer a mechanism for a Python script to discover where to find
a given static
On Thu, 14 Aug 2014, Thomas Goirand wrote:
What would probably work better would be to add the python library
inside upstream code.
That would work as well.
But then we have another issue: the Python module is supposed to be
packaged as python-something, and the JS libs are supposed to be
Just a quick explanation of what I'm doing with the python-xstatic-*
packages here. I've thought about how to do it best for a long time.
Upstream for the OpenStack dashboard (otherwise called Horizon) decided
(very rightly) that holding embedded copies of javascript files was a
bad idea. So they
On Thu, 14 Aug 2014, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Just a quick explanation of what I'm doing with the python-xstatic-*
packages here. I've thought about how to do it best for a long time.
Thanks! I was wondering.
It is also worth noting that the Debian package version for XStatic
modules is
On 14 Aug 2014 17:43, Thorsten Glaser t...@debian.org wrote:
It is also worth noting that the Debian package version for XStatic
modules is following the static file package version. For example, even
though upstream released XStatic-JQuery 1.10.2.1, the Debian package
version is 1.7.2.0,
Brian May dixit:
In what way will python-xstatic-jquery be better than libjs-jquery?
No.
What I meant is:
| Package: python-xstatic-jquery
| Provides: libjs-jquery
is better than
| Package: python-xstatic-jquery
| Depends: libjs-jquery
|
| Package: libjs-jquery
because it’s less packages.
On 08/14/2014 03:43 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Idea here: can’t python-xstatic-jquery just take over libjs-jquery
via Provides, so we have one binary package less after this? (Of
course, if the Debian JS maintainers agree, and probably will want
to (co-)maintain python-xstatic-jquery after
On 14/08/14 15:44, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 08/14/2014 07:02 PM, Brian May wrote:
In what way will python-xstatic-jquery be better than libjs-jquery?
It's not in any way better, it just adds the Python wrapper layer, so
upstream code can easily find out that jquery is located in
Quoting Thomas Goirand (2014-08-14 09:26:05)
Note that the XStatic python modules aren't just meta packages, they
also offer a mechanism for a Python script to discover where to find a
given static file in the system (which really, isn't obvious, as the
Debian archive is a bit messy in this
On 08/14/2014 11:38 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:
If the XStatic files are pure metadata (albeit in Python syntax and
installed to the PYTHONPATH, because when all you have in some of your
target OSs/environments is a Python hammer, everything looks like a
nail), wouldn't it make more sense to ask
11 matches
Mail list logo
