Hi Julian (2024.07.19_13:16:02_+)
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 11:06:46AM +, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> > [...]
> > > May be pybuild doesn't handle correctly a version string like
> > > 0.10.0+dfsg-1?
> >
> > Yeah, you shouldn't have to export that because pybuild does. But,
> > right, it's no
On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 11:06:46AM +, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> [...]
> > May be pybuild doesn't handle correctly a version string like 0.10.0+dfsg-1?
>
> Yeah, you shouldn't have to export that because pybuild does. But,
> right, it's not removing +dfsg. Now that PEP-440 versions are strongly
>
Hi Mathias (2024.07.18_09:10:01_+)
> I have no clue why this is working for you.
I was testing locally, not in salsa CI. So I ran into the thing you ran
into after the build, not before it.
> I removed the patch, tried your proposal and the build just fails because
> setuptools-scm writes aga
On Thursday, 18 July 2024 11:10:01 CEST Mathias Behrle wrote:
>
> I have no clue why this is working for you.
>
> I removed the patch, tried your proposal and the build just fails because
> setuptools-scm writes again a dev version to src/csb43/_version.py:
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/tryton-te
* Stefano Rivera: " Re: pybuild and setuptools_scm" (Tue, 16 Jul 2024 03:06:53
+):
Hi Stefano,
thanks for looking into it.
> > I had a similar problem when setuptools_scm kicked in during the build
> > process and produced versions different from the orig tarball. P
Hi Mathias (2024.07.12_06:47:39_+)
> I had a similar problem when setuptools_scm kicked in during the build process
> and produced versions different from the orig tarball. Packaging is in git and
> tarballs are imported from PyPI.
>
> I disabled the automatic versioning with
>
> https://sals
On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 11:29:51PM +, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Thomas (2024.07.12_12:53:54_+)
> > The way to deal with it, is simply something like this:
> >
> > export SETUPTOOLS_SCM_PRETEND_VERSION=$(shell dpkg-parsechangelog -SVersion
> > | sed -e 's/^[[:digit:]]*://' -e 's/[-].*//' -
Hi Paul (2024.07.12_10:59:43_+)
> > > The weird thing is that I can run "python3 -m build", even with the
> > > options that pybuild introduces, outside the gbp buildpackage environment,
> > > and it seems that the package data is obtained using setuptools_scm. But
> > > as part of the gbp invo
Hi Thomas (2024.07.12_12:53:54_+)
> The way to deal with it, is simply something like this:
>
> export SETUPTOOLS_SCM_PRETEND_VERSION=$(shell dpkg-parsechangelog -SVersion
> | sed -e 's/^[[:digit:]]*://' -e 's/[-].*//' -e 's/~git.*//' -e 's/~/.0/' -e
> 's/+dfsg1//' -e 's/+ds1//' | head -n 1)
>
Hi Paul!
On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 12:59:43PM +0200, Paul Boddie wrote:
> The packaging is in git, yes. I suppose what I don't understand is the role
> of
> setuptools_scm in building a package for installation (or the construction of
> a binary package). A source package will aim to incorporate
On 7/12/24 12:59, Paul Boddie wrote:
I suppose what I don't understand is the role of
setuptools_scm in building a package for installation (or the construction of
a binary package).
It has no role in it. For us (package maintainers), it's just an
annoyance that we need to deal with. For Python
On Friday, 12 July 2024 07:17:27 CEST Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Paul (2024.07.12_00:05:03_+)
>
> > The weird thing is that I can run "python3 -m build", even with the
> > options that pybuild introduces, outside the gbp buildpackage environment,
> > and it seems that the package data is obtai
* Stefano Rivera: " Re: pybuild and setuptools_scm" (Thu, 11 Jul 2024 23:01:14
+):
Hi Stefano,
> > I have been struggling to get some software packaged that relies on
> > setuptools_scm. It seems to effectively ignore the package data section in
> > a pyprojec
Hi Paul (2024.07.12_00:05:03_+)
> The weird thing is that I can run "python3 -m build", even with the options
> that pybuild introduces, outside the gbp buildpackage environment, and it
> seems that the package data is obtained using setuptools_scm. But as part of
> the gbp invocation, the p
On Friday, 12 July 2024 01:01:14 CEST Stefano Rivera wrote:
>
> Which source package is this?
This is the source for MoinMoin 2.0 which is currently unpackaged in Debian.
> Where did the source come from? Git or PyPI tarball?
It is actually an archive from the GitHub release page, integrated in
Hi Paul (2024.07.11_14:01:01_+)
> I have been struggling to get some software packaged that relies on
> setuptools_scm. It seems to effectively ignore the package data section in a
> pyproject.toml file and to include a broader collection of files when being
Which source package is this?
W
Hello,
I wonder if anyone can provide some advice about setuptools_scm interactions
with pybuild.
I have been struggling to get some software packaged that relies on
setuptools_scm. It seems to effectively ignore the package data section in a
pyproject.toml file and to include a broader collec
17 matches
Mail list logo
