Hi again, Am Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 08:44:32AM -0400 schrieb Yaroslav Halchenko: > On Tue, 22 Sep 2026, Jon Peirce wrote: > > Should you switch to building Studio instead of PsychoPy Studio? We > > will eventually replace the app but we plan to support both for another > > year or so until we're confident that Studio is fully feature complete > > (e.g. right now it doesn't have built-in demos) and robust. In most > > ways it's superior to the old Python/wx app, but it's still a very new > > codebase so we're calling it the "beta" option for now. I guess the > > question is for you whether you want to support beta and/or deprecated > > packages > > Coolio, thanks for the explanations!
+1 > So, I guess we should package psychopy-app package. I guess to > stay more inline with your naming convention we should keep calling it > 'psychopy-app' while making current 'psychopy' source package produce > both 'python3-psychopy' and 'psychopy' binaries with latter depending on > 'psychopy-app'. This way users would would keep installing "full" > 'psychopy' would get both python package (python3-psychopy) and the GUI. I might have misunderstood the explanation but what about *for the moment* just creating python3-psychopy from the current psychopy source package? I understood that the current source contains *working* Python3 modules and simply no working application. This is part of a different source package. > > Happy to jump on a call if that would help to clarify. > > I think we got it clear. Now just someone needs to do it... Anyone from > debian-med has spare cycles or token? I could imagine working on providing python3-psychopy and simply droping the app for the moment until there is someone sufficiently motivated to provide a package for the application. Kind regards Andreas. -- https://fam-tille.de
