Switching Default Python3 To Python3.5

[Scott Kitterman]

I went through the bad/unknown packages in the python3.5 transition tracker 
[1] and the remainder seems reasonable for doing the transition.  

Many of them only build support for the default python3 and so they will be 
bad until after they are rebuilt following the switch.  I filed bugs with 
patches for packages that seemed to be ~easy to make build for multiple 
versions.

Some of the remainder should not be build-depending on python3-dev at all 
since they don't have any arch specific content.  I filed a stack of bugs on 
those too (as well as doing a team upload or two).

That should leave in the neighborhood of 45 - 50 binNMUs, which isn't so many.

Does anyone object if I go ahead and ask the release team for a transition 
slot?

[1] https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/python3.5.html

Re: Joining the team

[Paul Tagliamonte]

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 08:31:31AM -0600, Ian Cordasco wrote:
> My Alioth account is sigmavirus24-guest.
> 
> I would like to join the team to help package and maintain
> python-betamax (ITP
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=808880) with Daniele
> Tricoli.
> 
> I don't maintain any other Debian packages and I'm not part of any
> other teams, but I'm eager to learn and help.

I'm also interested in sponsoring Ian's work in d-python, having him in
the team is a huge help

Thanks!
  Paul


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Joining the team

[Ian Cordasco]

Hi everyone,

I would like to join the debian-python team. I have read the policy at

  https://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/python-modules-policy.html

and accept it.

My Alioth account is sigmavirus24-guest.

I would like to join the team to help package and maintain
python-betamax (ITP
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=808880) with Daniele
Tricoli.

I don't maintain any other Debian packages and I'm not part of any
other teams, but I'm eager to learn and help.

Thanks!
Ian

Re: Enabling Python bindings for jellyfish

[Scott Kitterman]

On Thursday, December 31, 2015 06:32:43 PM Diego M. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 02:07:05PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Diego M. Rodriguez
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:56:20PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > > > I think the respective maintainers should talk and then discuss with
> > > their upstreams as the collision potential isn't just in Debian.
> > > 
> > > I'm chiming in as the (prospective) maintainer of the ITP
> > > python-jellyfish
> > > package, just to note that I have discussed it with Andreas [1] and
> > > fully
> > > agreed to rename "my" package. The choice of name was due to not being
> > > aware
> > > of the Python bindings on the existing DNA-jelyfish package (and in part
> > > also
> > > due to my inexperience on these matters), and I have contacted upstream
> > > earlier today in the hopes of coming up with a good alternative name.
> > > 
> > > I'd be happy to follow up on the discussion with upstream once I get a
> > > reply,
> > > in order to find out if he would be open to solving the conflict at a
> > > "higher"
> > > level.
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > 
> > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=806716#42
> > > --
> > > Diego M. Rodriguez
> > > 36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B  FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232

> > > > > That won't solve the problem, since both will provide the python 
> > module jellyfish
> 
> Fair point indeed, and I fully agree that ideally the problem should be
> solved at the python module level.
> 
> I'm wondering if you or other senior, more experienced developers could
> suggest what would be the recommended solution for the namespace conflict,
> taking into account:
> 
> a) DNA-jellyfish is an stablished Debian package since 2011 [1]
> b) STR-jellyfish is on PyPI [2] since 2010 (version 0.1)
> c) both packages started their Github repos around the same time (summer
> 2010) d) both packages seem to be a bit "niche" (popcon stats for
> "jellyfish" [3] and "beets" [4], the package that would depend on
> STR-jellyfish, seem to hint that they are both modestly used within Debian
> and cater to specific groups of users)
> e) other considerations I'm probably missing!
> 
> I would personally place a bit more weight on the fact that STR-jellyfish is
> already on PyPI (based on the rationale that it is arguably the "de facto"
> repository for Python packaging); but, again, I am relatively new to Debian
> practices and arguing for keeping consistency within the Debian repository
> seems reasonable to me as well.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644925
> [2] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/jellyfish
> [3] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=jellyfish
> [4] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=beets

Here's what Debian Policy has to say on the matter:

10.1. Binaries
--

 Two different packages must not install programs with different
 functionality but with the same filenames.  (The case of two programs
 having the same functionality but different implementations is handled
 via "alternatives" or the "Conflicts" mechanism.  See Section 3.9,
 `Maintainer Scripts' and Section 7.4, `Conflicting binary packages -
 `Conflicts'' respectively.) If this case happens, one of the programs
 must be renamed.  The maintainers should report this to the
 `debian-devel' mailing list and try to find a consensus about which
 program will have to be renamed.  If a consensus cannot be reached,
 _both_ programs must be renamed.


That bit of policy doesn't officially kick in yet since these aren't both in 
the 
archive yet.  The policy is about consensus finding and not winning and losing. 
 
That's why I recommended discussing with the upstreams (and hopefully getting 
them in direct communication).

Scott K

P.S.  Fixed top posting

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Enabling Python bindings for jellyfish

[Diego M. Rodriguez]

> That bit of policy doesn't officially kick in yet since these aren't both in 
> the 
> archive yet.  The policy is about consensus finding and not winning and 
> losing.  
> That's why I recommended discussing with the upstreams (and hopefully getting 
> them in direct communication).

Thanks for the pointer to the relevant Debian Policy chapter, Scott. My
previous message was indeed intented to hopefully serve as a common ground
towards reaching a consensus and as an aid when taking the discussion upstream,
rather than force or impose a decision - my apologies if it came too strong!

-- 
Diego M. Rodriguez
36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B  FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Request to join PAPT

[Scott Kitterman]

On Saturday, December 19, 2015 03:24:47 PM Neil Muller wrote:
> I sent a request to join the PAPT via alioth [1] some weeks ago, but
> there doesn't appear to have been any response to that.
> 
> I intend to adopt irker [2], and would like to see it maintained as
> part of the PAPT.
> 
> My alioth username is drnlmza-guest . I am already a member of the DPMT [3].
> 
> Thanks
> 
> [1] As is currently specified by
> http://python-apps.alioth.debian.org/policy.html
> 
> [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=756090
> 
> [3] Currently taking care of sqlobject & pydispatcher .

Welcome to the team.

Scott K

Re: Joining the team

[Daniele Tricoli]

On Thursday, December 31, 2015 08:31:31 AM Ian Cordasco wrote:
> I would like to join the team to help package and maintain
> python-betamax (ITP
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=808880) with Daniele
> Tricoli.

I very glad Ian applied to join the DPMT!

I'm happy to have him as a co-maintainer of Betamax, and since he is also 
upstream of both requests and urllib3, if he want to help me maintaining both, 
I will feel honoured! :)

-- 
 Daniele Tricoli 'eriol'
 https://mornie.org

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Joining DPMT / PAPT

[Scott Kitterman]

On Tuesday, December 08, 2015 04:54:16 PM Pierre Equoy wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> I've been working on packaging and maintaining Checkbox [1] packages.
> 
> I would like to join the Debian Python Modules Team and the Python
> Applications Packaging Team in order to maintain the Checkbox-related
> packages on Debian.
> 
> My Alioth login is pierre-equoy-guest.
> 
> I have read and accept the policy if this team:
> https://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/policy.html
> 
> Regards,
> 
> [1]: https://launchpad.net/checkbox

Welcome to the team.

Scott K

Re: Joining the team

[Ian Cordasco]

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Scott Kitterman  wrote:
> On Thursday, December 31, 2015 08:31:31 AM Ian Cordasco wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I would like to join the debian-python team. I have read the policy at
>>
>>   https://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/python-modules-policy.html
>>
>> and accept it.
>>
>> My Alioth account is sigmavirus24-guest.
>>
>> I would like to join the team to help package and maintain
>> python-betamax (ITP
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=808880) with Daniele
>> Tricoli.
>>
>> I don't maintain any other Debian packages and I'm not part of any
>> other teams, but I'm eager to learn and help.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Ian
>
> Welcome to the team.

Thank you!

Re: Request to join

[Scott Kitterman]

On Sunday, December 13, 2015 05:02:47 PM Christopher Baines wrote:
> I would like to join the python modules team. I am currently working on
> packaging sklearn-pandas, which I would like to maintain as part of the
> team. I am also interested in getting involved in general maintenance of
> team packages.
> 
> I have read an accept https://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/policy.html.
> 
> My alioth login is cbaines-guest.

Welcome to the team.

Scott K

Re: Request to join the DPMT

[Diego M. Rodriguez]

> Welcome to the team.
> 
> Scott K

Thank you - looking forward to a fruitful collaboration!

Best regards,
-- 
Diego M. Rodriguez
36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B  FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Request to join the DPMT

[Scott Kitterman]

On Friday, December 18, 2015 06:25:14 PM Diego M. Rodriguez wrote:
> Dear Debian Python Modules Team,
> 
> I would like to join the team with the initial goal of maintaining the
> python-jellyfish package, which has currently ITP [1] and RFS [2] status,
> under the umbrella and guidance of the team. The jellyfish package is a
> dependency needed for updating the beets [3] package, which I currently
> contribute to in the upstream repository [4].
> 
> Once I learn the ropes, I would love to lend a hand with any other packages
> - not only beets itself but hopefully any other packages that need work, in
> the hopes of giving back to Debian after many years being a regular user. I
> have been working professionally with Python for the last 5 years in a
> number of projects, most of them related to Django as well, and
> occasionally make some small-time code contributions to related packages on
> their ecosystem (such as django-extensions and py-authorize).
> 
> Alternatively, I'd also welcome guidance and/or sponsorship, in case joining
> the team is deemed a bit premature or undesired for any reason. I have
> worked on the package for the last couple of weeks on mentors [5],
> hopefully adhering to the recommended Debian practices, but the work has
> not been formally reviewed yet.
> 
> My alioth login name is "diegom-guest". I have read the DPMT policy [6] and
> I accept it.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=806716
> [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=807432
> [3] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=775719
> [4] https://github.com/sampsyo/beets/commits/master?author=diego-plan9
> [5] https://mentors.debian.net/package/python-jellyfish
> [6] http://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/policy.html

Welcome to the team.

Scott K

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Enabling Python bindings for jellyfish

[Diego M. Rodriguez]

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 02:07:05PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> That won't solve the problem, since both will provide the python module
> jellyfish

Fair point indeed, and I fully agree that ideally the problem should be solved
at the python module level.

I'm wondering if you or other senior, more experienced developers could
suggest what would be the recommended solution for the namespace conflict,
taking into account:

a) DNA-jellyfish is an stablished Debian package since 2011 [1]
b) STR-jellyfish is on PyPI [2] since 2010 (version 0.1)
c) both packages started their Github repos around the same time (summer 2010)
d) both packages seem to be a bit "niche" (popcon stats for "jellyfish" [3] and
"beets" [4], the package that would depend on STR-jellyfish, seem to hint that
they are both modestly used within Debian and cater to specific groups of
users)
e) other considerations I'm probably missing!

I would personally place a bit more weight on the fact that STR-jellyfish is
already on PyPI (based on the rationale that it is arguably the "de facto"
repository for Python packaging); but, again, I am relatively new to
Debian practices and arguing for keeping consistency within the Debian
repository seems reasonable to me as well.

Best regards,

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644925
[2] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/jellyfish
[3] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=jellyfish
[4] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=beets

> 
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Diego M. Rodriguez 
> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:56:20PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > > I think the respective maintainers should talk and then discuss with
> > their
> > > upstreams as the collision potential isn't just in Debian.
> >
> > I'm chiming in as the (prospective) maintainer of the ITP python-jellyfish
> > package, just to note that I have discussed it with Andreas [1] and fully
> > agreed to rename "my" package. The choice of name was due to not being
> > aware
> > of the Python bindings on the existing DNA-jelyfish package (and in part
> > also
> > due to my inexperience on these matters), and I have contacted upstream
> > earlier today in the hopes of coming up with a good alternative name.
> >
> > I'd be happy to follow up on the discussion with upstream once I get a
> > reply,
> > in order to find out if he would be open to solving the conflict at a
> > "higher"
> > level.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=806716#42
> > --
> > Diego M. Rodriguez
> > 36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B  FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> All programmers are playwrights, and all computers are lousy actors.
> 
> #define sizeof(x) rand()
> :wq

-- 
Diego M. Rodriguez
36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B  FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Joining the team

[Scott Kitterman]

On Thursday, December 31, 2015 08:31:31 AM Ian Cordasco wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I would like to join the debian-python team. I have read the policy at
> 
>   https://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/python-modules-policy.html
> 
> and accept it.
> 
> My Alioth account is sigmavirus24-guest.
> 
> I would like to join the team to help package and maintain
> python-betamax (ITP
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=808880) with Daniele
> Tricoli.
> 
> I don't maintain any other Debian packages and I'm not part of any
> other teams, but I'm eager to learn and help.
> 
> Thanks!
> Ian

Welcome to the team.

Scott K

Re: Enabling Python bindings for jellyfish

[Andreas Tille]

Hi Guillaume,

when Diego intended to package python-jellyfish a discussion about the
duplicate name came up.  I even became aware that your jellyfish code
provides Python bindings and I intend to provide these as Debian package
as well.  This would lead to a conflict to the completely unrelated
multimedia jellyfish project.

Diego has layed out the problem on his posting to the Debian Python
mailing list
(https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2015/12/msg00101.html) where
you can read the full thread about the problem.  Please let us know
what you think about the naming issue.

Kind regards

 Andreas.

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 06:32:43PM +0100, Diego M. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 02:07:05PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > That won't solve the problem, since both will provide the python module
> > jellyfish
> 
> Fair point indeed, and I fully agree that ideally the problem should be solved
> at the python module level.
> 
> I'm wondering if you or other senior, more experienced developers could
> suggest what would be the recommended solution for the namespace conflict,
> taking into account:
> 
> a) DNA-jellyfish is an stablished Debian package since 2011 [1]
> b) STR-jellyfish is on PyPI [2] since 2010 (version 0.1)
> c) both packages started their Github repos around the same time (summer 2010)
> d) both packages seem to be a bit "niche" (popcon stats for "jellyfish" [3] 
> and
> "beets" [4], the package that would depend on STR-jellyfish, seem to hint that
> they are both modestly used within Debian and cater to specific groups of
> users)
> e) other considerations I'm probably missing!
> 
> I would personally place a bit more weight on the fact that STR-jellyfish is
> already on PyPI (based on the rationale that it is arguably the "de facto"
> repository for Python packaging); but, again, I am relatively new to
> Debian practices and arguing for keeping consistency within the Debian
> repository seems reasonable to me as well.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644925
> [2] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/jellyfish
> [3] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=jellyfish
> [4] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=beets
> 
> > 
> > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Diego M. Rodriguez 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:56:20PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > > > I think the respective maintainers should talk and then discuss with
> > > their
> > > > upstreams as the collision potential isn't just in Debian.
> > >
> > > I'm chiming in as the (prospective) maintainer of the ITP python-jellyfish
> > > package, just to note that I have discussed it with Andreas [1] and fully
> > > agreed to rename "my" package. The choice of name was due to not being
> > > aware
> > > of the Python bindings on the existing DNA-jelyfish package (and in part
> > > also
> > > due to my inexperience on these matters), and I have contacted upstream
> > > earlier today in the hopes of coming up with a good alternative name.
> > >
> > > I'd be happy to follow up on the discussion with upstream once I get a
> > > reply,
> > > in order to find out if he would be open to solving the conflict at a
> > > "higher"
> > > level.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=806716#42
> > > --
> > > Diego M. Rodriguez
> > > 36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B  FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > All programmers are playwrights, and all computers are lousy actors.
> > 
> > #define sizeof(x) rand()
> > :wq
> 
> -- 
> Diego M. Rodriguez
> 36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B  FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232
> 



-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Re: Enabling Python bindings for jellyfish

[Guillaume Marcais]

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Andreas Tille  wrote:

> Hi Guillaume,
>
> when Diego intended to package python-jellyfish a discussion about the
> duplicate name came up.  I even became aware that your jellyfish code
> provides Python bindings and I intend to provide these as Debian package
> as well.  This would lead to a conflict to the completely unrelated
> multimedia jellyfish project.
>
> Diego has layed out the problem on his posting to the Debian Python
> mailing list
> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2015/12/msg00101.html) where
> you can read the full thread about the problem.  Please let us know
> what you think about the naming issue.
>

Hi all,

if I am attached to the name Jellyfish for the main software itself, the
script bindings have seen little use (I believe) up to now. Renaming python
module to dna_jellyfish, bio_jellyfish, or some other suggestion, would be
OK with me.

Regarding the module itself, it should work for both Python2 and Python3.
If you have example where it does not, please let me know.

Guillaume.


> Kind regards
>
>  Andreas.
>
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 06:32:43PM +0100, Diego M. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 02:07:05PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > > That won't solve the problem, since both will provide the python module
> > > jellyfish
> >
> > Fair point indeed, and I fully agree that ideally the problem should be
> solved
> > at the python module level.
> >
> > I'm wondering if you or other senior, more experienced developers could
> > suggest what would be the recommended solution for the namespace
> conflict,
> > taking into account:
> >
> > a) DNA-jellyfish is an stablished Debian package since 2011 [1]
> > b) STR-jellyfish is on PyPI [2] since 2010 (version 0.1)
> > c) both packages started their Github repos around the same time (summer
> 2010)
> > d) both packages seem to be a bit "niche" (popcon stats for "jellyfish"
> [3] and
> > "beets" [4], the package that would depend on STR-jellyfish, seem to
> hint that
> > they are both modestly used within Debian and cater to specific groups of
> > users)
> > e) other considerations I'm probably missing!
> >
> > I would personally place a bit more weight on the fact that
> STR-jellyfish is
> > already on PyPI (based on the rationale that it is arguably the "de
> facto"
> > repository for Python packaging); but, again, I am relatively new to
> > Debian practices and arguing for keeping consistency within the Debian
> > repository seems reasonable to me as well.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644925
> > [2] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/jellyfish
> > [3] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=jellyfish
> > [4] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=beets
> >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Diego M. Rodriguez <
> diego.pl...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:56:20PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > > > > I think the respective maintainers should talk and then discuss
> with
> > > > their
> > > > > upstreams as the collision potential isn't just in Debian.
> > > >
> > > > I'm chiming in as the (prospective) maintainer of the ITP
> python-jellyfish
> > > > package, just to note that I have discussed it with Andreas [1] and
> fully
> > > > agreed to rename "my" package. The choice of name was due to not
> being
> > > > aware
> > > > of the Python bindings on the existing DNA-jelyfish package (and in
> part
> > > > also
> > > > due to my inexperience on these matters), and I have contacted
> upstream
> > > > earlier today in the hopes of coming up with a good alternative name.
> > > >
> > > > I'd be happy to follow up on the discussion with upstream once I get
> a
> > > > reply,
> > > > in order to find out if he would be open to solving the conflict at a
> > > > "higher"
> > > > level.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=806716#42
> > > > --
> > > > Diego M. Rodriguez
> > > > 36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B  FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > All programmers are playwrights, and all computers are lousy actors.
> > >
> > > #define sizeof(x) rand()
> > > :wq
> >
> > --
> > Diego M. Rodriguez
> > 36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B  FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://fam-tille.de
>