Re: Current state of packaging Python software for Debian

2011-06-15 Thread Zygmunt Krynicki
W dniu 15.06.2011 03:28, Ben Finney pisze: If we are talking from a perspective of upstream developers that also maintain their packages then I would *love* to see setup.py sdist-test and would use it each day. ;-) How would a putative ‘sdist_test’ differ from ‘test’? Why is this an

Re: Current state of packaging Python software for Debian

2011-06-15 Thread Brian Sutherland
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:18:25AM +0200, Zygmunt Krynicki wrote: W dniu 15.06.2011 03:28, Ben Finney pisze: If we are talking from a perspective of upstream developers that also maintain their packages then I would *love* to see setup.py sdist-test and would use it each day. ;-) How

Re: Current state of packaging Python software for Debian

2011-06-15 Thread Éric Araujo
Hi, [Barry Warsaw] [Zygmunt Krynicki] Can please we have standardized hooks to build sphinx documentation and run setup.py test tests? I'd like to see the packaging folks address this. Eric is subscribed to this list and can probably speak to packaging's take on it, but my preferences

Re: Current state of packaging Python software for Debian

2011-06-15 Thread Éric Araujo
Le 15/06/2011 10:18, Zygmunt Krynicki a écrit : W dniu 15.06.2011 03:28, Ben Finney pisze: If we are talking from a perspective of upstream developers that also maintain their packages then I would *love* to see setup.py sdist-test and would use it each day. ;-) How would a putative

Re: private modules and dh_python2

2011-06-15 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Jun 14, 2011, at 12:02 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: it is fine and it is useful... as a submodule, not as a top-level module Agreed! I think I get what you're driving at now. Some applications don't put their Python code or tests in a package. In those cases, yes by all means a private

Where to put debugging extension

2011-06-15 Thread Nikolaus Rath
Hello, Should I put the extension build for the debug interpreter into the normal python-xx package, or into the python-xx-dbg package that also contains the debugging symbols? The first variant seems to be more common, but I'm having trouble to come up with a good pattern for debian/xx.install

Re: Where to put debugging extension

2011-06-15 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le mercredi 15 juin 2011 à 15:47 -0400, Nikolaus Rath a écrit : Should I put the extension build for the debug interpreter into the normal python-xx package, or into the python-xx-dbg package that also contains the debugging symbols? It should definitely go into python-xx-dbg. The first

Re: Where to put debugging extension

2011-06-15 Thread Christian Kastner
On 06/15/2011 09:47 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: Should I put the extension build for the debug interpreter into the normal python-xx package, or into the python-xx-dbg package that also contains the debugging symbols? The first variant seems to be more common, but I'm having trouble to come up

Re: Current state of packaging Python software for Debian

2011-06-15 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org, 2011-06-15, 07:31: On the debian side I always have to copy-paste the same-looking code over and over again (symlink jquery, If you use dh_link in your debian/rules (most likely you do), you need only a single line in debian/packagename.links to do that.