Joining the team and RFS python-avc

Piotr O¿arowski wrote:
> Hi Fabrizio
>
>> I am looking for sponsorship for my new python module: python-avc,
>> ITP http://bugs.debian.org/448646,
>> mentors http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-avc.
>
> * remove "Provides: ${python:Provides}" - architecture independent
> packages don't need it

OK.

> * you've missed some packages in Depends (for modules: gtk, qt, PyQt4,
> Tkinter)

Since python-avc is multiplatform, a user will probably use only one
among the supported toolkits. So python-avc really needs to depend from
them all or it only suggests them?

>
> I will take a deeper look and upload[1] this package after work
>
>> I would like to join the team, so I can maintain my package within the
>> team.
>
> I will add you this evening, I don't have my alioth password ATM
>
> [1] if ftp-master.debian.org will be back online, there are some problems
> with it now
>
>

--
Cheers,
Fabrizio.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org

>> * you've missed some packages in Depends (for modules: gtk, qt, PyQt4,
>> Tkinter)
>
> Since python-avc is multiplatform, a user will probably use only one
> among the supported toolkits. So python-avc really needs to depend from
> them all or it only suggests them?

How is decided which toolkit avc uses?
If there's a preferred one, let's call it foo, I'd add
Recommends: foo | bar | fuzz
if not, I'd add them all to suggests.


Cheers,

Bernd

--
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd.TakeThisOut@bzed.de> <http://bzed.de/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org

Fabrizio Pollastri wrote:
> Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>>>> * you've missed some packages in Depends (for modules: gtk, qt, PyQt4,
>>>> Tkinter)
>>> Since python-avc is multiplatform, a user will probably use only one
>>> among the supported toolkits. So python-avc really needs to depend from
>>> them all or it only suggests them?
>>
>> How is decided which toolkit avc uses?
>
> By user selection: he imports from python-avc the proper module for the
> desired toolkit, i.e. for gtk 'from avc.avcgtk import *'.

Then I'd add them all to Suggests:

Cheers,

Bernd

--
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd.DeleteThis@bzed.de> <http://bzed.de/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org

Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>>> * you've missed some packages in Depends (for modules: gtk, qt, PyQt4,
>>> Tkinter)
>> Since python-avc is multiplatform, a user will probably use only one
>> among the supported toolkits. So python-avc really needs to depend from
>> them all or it only suggests them?
>
> How is decided which toolkit avc uses?

By user selection: he imports from python-avc the proper module for the
desired toolkit, i.e. for gtk 'from avc.avcgtk import *'.

--
Cheers,
Fabrizio.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org

Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le lundi 05 novembre 2007 à 15:40 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit :
>> Hi Fabrizio
>>
>>> I am looking for sponsorship for my new python module: python-avc,
>>> ITP http://bugs.debian.org/448646,
>>> mentors http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-avc.
>> * remove "Provides: ${python:Provides}" - architecture independent
>> packages don't need it
>
> Of course they do. What if a package Depends: python2.5, python2.5-avc?

No, they don't.

Please get the _official_ Python Policy fixed and such requirements
included if you like to have them. Neither the wiki nor Manoj's home are
the appropriate place for that. Coming up with random requirements or
undocumented things here is not the way to go.

http://wiki.debian.org/DebianPython/NewPolicy requires Provides:
${python:Provides} in two cases:
- if the package used to build pythonX.Y-foo binary packages
(the package didn't exist before, so I never built such packages)
- if your package provides public extensions.
(no extensions here - please note that it defines an extension as .so
file some lines above)


http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ch-module_pa...ges.htm
says:

2.5 Provides

Provides in packages of the form python-foo must be specified, if the
package contains an extension for more than one python version. Provides
should also be added on request of maintainers who depend on a
non-default python version.

--> Same here - contains an _extension_. An arch:all package doesn't
ship extensions. The policy defines extensions in the same way as the
wiki does.

Not to forget that the policy is still outdated.


Even Manoj's start of a new policy document says the same:
http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/manoj-policy/x316.html#AEN469

Public pure Python modules that have a subset of all python versions
supported, or for public extensions, the Provides field indicates which
versions of Python are supported (for which one may import the module).
For every version of python supported the package should provide
pythonX.Y-foo packages. This assumes that the package correctly depends
on all the appropriate versions of any version specific module that it
itself requires.

--> We neither have an extension here, nor does it support a _subset_ of
Python versions.


I'd suggest it's time to replace the more than outdated policy by
Manoj's new version, which seems to be fine (didn't read everything yet).


--
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd DeleteThis @bzed.de> <http://bzed.de/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org

Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 06 novembre 2007 à 00:22 +0100, Bernd Zeimetz a écrit :
>> Please get the _official_ Python Policy fixed and such requirements
>> included if you like to have them.
>
> The official Python policy is currently unmaintained.
>

Then let's maintain it again. We maintain a lot of packages in a team,
so I can't see a problem to maintain the policy there, too.

--
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd.DeleteThis@bzed.de> <http://bzed.de/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org

Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le lundi 05 novembre 2007 à 23:57 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski a écrit :
>>>> * remove "Provides: ${python:Provides}" - architecture independent
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>> packages don't need it
>>> Of course they do. What if a package Depends: python2.5, python2.5-avc?
>> Depends: python2.5, python-avc (>=new_policy_version)
>
> Sorry, but that dependency is incorrect. What if a later python-avc
> version starts requiring python >= 2.6 ?

Then you have a problem anyway - all packages Depending on python-avc
(which is the only sane default for packages which work for all python
versions AND depend on a different package) will need to be updated.
Adding versioned depends again brings us back to the old policy.


--
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd.RemoveThis@bzed.de> <http://bzed.de/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.RemoveThis@lists.debian.org

reassign 447231 debian-policy,python-defaults
thanks

[adding the debian-python list again, I guess you've missed it].

Matthias Klose wrote:
> Bernd Zeimetz writes:
>> Then let's maintain it again. We maintain a lot of packages in a team,
>> so I can't see a problem to maintain the policy there, too.
>
> The policy files are not unmaintained;

They are. Maintaining is more than having a minimal update every other year.

> proposed policy changes should
> be filed as bug reports against python-defaults.

If that's the preferred way - I'm reassigning a related bug from
d-policy to d-policy AND python-defaults to make sure it's not forgotten.

Also in my opinion the Python policy should be team-maintained
(preferable by a small and _active_ team) like most Python related
packages.

Manoj's Python 'policy' is much more complete, formal and uptodate then
the official one, so it should replace the current one.

--
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd DeleteThis @bzed.de> <http://bzed.de/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org