As described in more detail in my email below, I've been working on packaging SAGE, which provides an excellent ipython-based interface to numerous free software mathematics libraries, and its 26 dependencies not yet in Debian for Debian. At this point, I am looking for Debian developers to maintain those dependencies that are useful outside SAGE.
It was pointed out that the scipy sandbox packages python-arpack (#480076) and python-delaunay (#480071) that I've debianized as part of my effort to Debianize SAGE (details below) are probably best maintained by the people who maintain python-scipy in Debian, especially since it sounds like arpack and delaunay are going to be merged into mainline scipy at some point in time: <http://jarrodmillman.blogspot.com/2007/12/end-of-scipy-sandbox.html> Would the Debian Python Modules Team be willing to maintain these packages from the scipy sandbox? My draft source packages are available from my repository at: http://stuff.mit.edu/~sage/apt/pool/main/p/python-delaunay/python-delaunay_0.0.20071020-1.dsc http://stuff.mit.edu/~sage/apt/pool/main/p/python-arpack/python-arpack_0.0.20071020-1.dsc The python-delaunay package should be essentially ready to upload (though I'm sure you'll want to check over my work before adopting it; the Description needs work), while the python-arpack package has some lintian warnings that I somehow missed. Another python module that I've Debianized as part of this effort is polybori (#480077). It is lintian-clean modulo trivial fixes, though the rules file is a bit messy because of the issues involved in using scons to build their packages for several python versions. My draft packaging of a polybori release coming out in the next week (which fixes for all the upstream problems that I found packaging it) is available in my repository at: http://stuff.mit.edu/~sage/apt/pool/main/p/polybori/polybori_0.4-0.dsc So, if anyone's interested in maintaining polybori (or, for that matter, any of the other packages whose RFP bugs are blocking #455292) for Debian, I'd appreciate the help. -Tim Abbott ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 02:44:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Timothy G Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Score: -8 Subject: SAGE packages for Debian I've been working on packaging for Debian SAGE (http://sagemath.org), a large free mathematics software conglomeration that is competing with proprietary mathematical software systems such as Mathematica, Matlab, Maple, and Magma (Debian bug #455292). This has been a rather large effort because a major contribution of SAGE is providing an excellent ipython-base interface to a number of other free software mathematics libraries; the SAGE distribution comes with some 71 dependencies, of which only around 2/3 are available in Debian already. I currently have a working apt repository from which one can "apt-get install sagemath" (some details on the repository are available at <http://wiki.sagemath.org/DebianSAGE>) with some 26 source packages in it that I created for the SAGE dependencies. The repository also contains modified versions of various Debian packages with quick workarounds for bugs #472392, #474080, #474083, #459200. The packages are tested to the extent that I have run a full set of SAGE doctests against them with two different SAGE releases, and they largely seem to work (though there are definitely a number of bugs remaining). However, while it is nice to have a repository that people who want to use SAGE can add to their sources.list, it would be far better for SAGE to be available in Debian (I think having SAGE packages ready for lenny is a reasonable goal). The primary problem that makes my packages potentially unsuitable for uploading to Debian now is many of them may violate Debian library policy: - shared libraries whose soname is 0.0.0 (suggesting the upstream may not actually be doing versioning) - static libraries compiled with -fPIC (something strongly discouraged in the library packaging guide) - shared libraries that don't have versioning at all (clearly a bug) For the shared libraries that are missing sonames entirely, I am in contact with the upstream developers and they are working on getting some sort of shared library versioning implemented (the SAGE developers are very supportive of this effort and have offered to help the upstream developers with some of these library versioning issues). Below I list new source packages categorized by roughly how ready they are for being uploaded to the Debian archive. Many of them have "description-contains-homepage" and "out-of-date-standards-version 3.7.2" lintian warnings because I wrote most of the control files on etch, and several have slightly more serious "binary-without-manpage" warnings. The secondary problem with getting these 26 source packages into Debian is that I simply don't have the time to responsibly maintain 26 source packages in Debian. So, I'm looking for people and teams in Debian to adopt some of these SAGE dependencies and upload them in time for Lenny. My guess is the right Debian protocol for coordinating this is for me to file RFP bugs for all the packages below, linking in each to my existing draft packaging and mark those RFP bugs as all blocking #455292. But I'd appreciate feedback on this plan before I file 26 bug reports. If you're interested in helping maintain SAGE and its dependencies in Debian, you should join us on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (I have no objection to eventually migrating to a lists.debian.org list in the future, but that's what we've been using thus far). Any feedback or suggestions would also be greatly appreciated. -Tim Abbott Packages with no problems worse than missing man pages: python-arpack (from the scipy sandbox) python-delaunay (from the scipy sandbox) flintqs genus2reduction gfan [but depends on cddlib, see below] palp rubiks sympow lcalc polybori Packages with suspicious 0.0.0 sonames: libfplll iml libm4ri [also needs description] givaro linbox-wrap Packages with no shared library whose static library is compiled with -fPIC linbox symmetrica tachyon cddlib Packages that have clear library policy issues: eclib [no soname] flint [no soname] libzn-poly [no soname, though I've sent a patch for this upstream] ntl [no soname, though I've sent a patch for this upstream] singular [no soname] Packages that have other oustanding issues: guava [binaries under /usr/share/gap; also many lintian warnings will be fixed in the 3.5 upstream release] sagemath [numerous isuses] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Python-modules-team mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/python-modules-team
