On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Attached is a proposed change to the Debian Python policy to focus on Python3
> within the distribution. The intent is to document and start a large journey
> towards one Python stack in Debian. This is unlikely to happen for jessie+1,
> b
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On May 07, 2014, at 02:29 PM, Thomas Kluyver wrote:
>
>>This fork looks like it's actively maintained, and has a recent release on
>>PyPI (as suds-jurko):
>>https://bitbucket.org/jurko/suds
>
> There seems to be quite a few forks on PyPI:
>
> h
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> FWIW, while I think getting the python policy to recommend Python3 is a good
>> step forward, I think it's more important that we make sure the base system
>> is leading by example.
On May 07, 2014, at 02:29 PM, Thomas Kluyver wrote:
>This fork looks like it's actively maintained, and has a recent release on
>PyPI (as suds-jurko):
>https://bitbucket.org/jurko/suds
There seems to be quite a few forks on PyPI:
https://pypi.python.org/pypi?%3Aaction=search&term=suds&submit=sea
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 11:43:24PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 07.05.2014 23:01, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:15:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >> Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> + ++ +
> Applications sho
On May 07, 2014, at 11:43 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>thas was "tools outside the archive". Debian has some infrastructure written
>in Python. I don't know if all of this is packaged and available in the
>archive.
I'm personally less concerned about those than packages inside the archive.
-Barr
On May 07, 2014, at 02:01 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
>I don't think scripts "outside the archive" are in scope for the python
>policy; and I don't think this is what Barry was referring to. I think he
>meant python commandline programs, which some people may not think of as
>being "applications"?
Am 07.05.2014 23:01, schrieb Steve Langasek:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:15:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
+ ++ + Applications
should use
Python3, and should not be + packaged for Python2 as we
On 7 May 2014 14:11, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> If I had more time to blow, I'd likely try a run at something SUDS API
> compatible in Python 3. Won't happen any time soon for me, but it's
> something I will eternally praise someone over.
>
> So many people have tried to forward-port the SUDS code
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:15:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
>> >> +
>> >> +
>> >> +
>> >> +Applications should use Python3, and should not be
>> >> +packaged for Py
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 10:15:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> >> +
> >> +
> >> +
> >> +Applications should use Python3, and should not be
> >> +packaged for Python2 as well.
> >> +
> > Maybe also that system scripts
On May 08, 2014, at 06:41 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
>Can we converge on a single way to represent the names of these systems
>in the document? Currently there seems to be “python3”, “Python3”,
>“Python 3” used indiscriminately, without being clear why they would be
>spelled differently like that.
>
>I
Matthias Klose writes:
> === modified file 'debian/python-policy.sgml'
> --- debian/python-policy.sgml 2013-05-22 02:12:02 +
> +++ debian/python-policy.sgml 2014-05-07 14:34:24 +
[…]
> @@ -42,8 +42,7 @@
>
>
>
> - Copyright © 1999, 2001, 2003, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2011,
Am 07.05.2014 17:27, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
>> +
>> +
>> +
>> + Applications should use Python3, and should not be
>> + packaged for Python2 as well.
>> +
>
> Maybe also that system scripts written in Python should be Python 3 and not
> Python 2. I'd add
On May 07, 2014, at 05:49 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>[Barry Warsaw, 2014-05-07]
>> So the fix if they do FTBFS would be to add ${python:Depends} or
>> ${python3:Depends}?
>
>yes. Note that missing ${python:Depends} or ${python3:Depends} in
>Depends in most probably a bug anyway.
I think lintian
[Barry Warsaw, 2014-05-07]
> So the fix if they do FTBFS would be to add ${python:Depends} or
> ${python3:Depends}?
yes. Note that missing ${python:Depends} or ${python3:Depends} in
Depends in most probably a bug anyway.
> There's another weird corner case I guess, which is, that related binary
>
On May 7, 2014, at 11:35 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> The stuff vendorized inside there don't have to have the
> dist-info directories, so perhaps they don't need to be wheeled at all, but
> they *do* have to be vendorized because of technicalities in the way pip works
> within a virtual environme
On May 07, 2014, at 12:21 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>pip is a specical case here, because we want to mimic the wheel packages which
>come with python upstream. these can't be shipped in the debian python source
>package, but they are needed to make the pyvenv command work. so we have to
>construc
On Wednesday, May 07, 2014 11:27:20 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Should we also update Appendix B to promote --buildsystem=pybuild or at
> least reference it?
It's a reasonably safe bet that almost anything needs update.
Scott K
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with
On May 07, 2014, at 04:45 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>Attached is a proposed change to the Debian Python policy to focus on Python3
>within the distribution. The intent is to document and start a large journey
>towards one Python stack in Debian. This is unlikely to happen for jessie+1,
>but we sh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anyone? Matthias, perhaps?
Greetings,
On 06/05/14 20:05, Luis Alejandro Martínez Faneyth wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm a little worried about bug #702005 and the lack of attention
> it's getting.
>
> This bug is marked as resolved, and indeed it ha
Attached is a proposed change to the Debian Python policy to focus on Python3
within the distribution. The intent is to document and start a large journey
towards one Python stack in Debian. This is unlikely to happen for jessie+1, but
we should state the plan now so that it doesn't come later as
On May 07, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>Am 07.05.2014 12:17, schrieb Piotr Ożarowski:
>> dh_python2 ignores python3-* packages, dh_python3 ignores python-*
>> packages, but in all other packages both of them will try to handle .py
>> files. To avoid possible unnecessary dependencies o
[Matthias Klose, 2014-05-07]
> Am 07.05.2014 10:16, schrieb Piotr Ożarowski:
> > [Barry Warsaw, 2014-05-07]
> >> Generating the wheels during package build is pretty easy I think. You
> >> just
> >> B-D on python*-wheel (which just got approved from NEW) and then if the
> >> package uses setuptoo
[Matthias Klose, 2014-05-07]
> Am 07.05.2014 12:17, schrieb Piotr Ożarowski:
> > Should I change dh_python* behaviour to ignore all binary packages that
> > do not have appropriate ${python:Depends} template in Depends?
>
> how many packages will fail to build, or will produce non working packages
Am 07.05.2014 12:17, schrieb Piotr Ożarowski:
> dh_python2 ignores python3-* packages, dh_python3 ignores python-*
> packages, but in all other packages both of them will try to handle .py
> files. To avoid possible unnecessary dependencies or shebang rewrites,
> debhelper's -N (--no-package) or -p
Am 07.05.2014 10:16, schrieb Piotr Ożarowski:
> [Barry Warsaw, 2014-05-07]
>> Generating the wheels during package build is pretty easy I think. You just
>> B-D on python*-wheel (which just got approved from NEW) and then if the
>> package uses setuptools, you just add something like:
>>
>> py
dh_python2 ignores python3-* packages, dh_python3 ignores python-*
packages, but in all other packages both of them will try to handle .py
files. To avoid possible unnecessary dependencies or shebang rewrites,
debhelper's -N (--no-package) or -p (--package) options should be used.
Should I change
[Barry Warsaw, 2014-05-07]
> Generating the wheels during package build is pretty easy I think. You just
> B-D on python*-wheel (which just got approved from NEW) and then if the
> package uses setuptools, you just add something like:
>
> python3 setup.py bdist_wheel -d \
> debian/pyt
29 matches
Mail list logo
