Re: Ad-hoc Debian Python BoF at PyCon US 2017

2017-06-20 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2017-06-20 16:40:26 +0200 (+0200), Matthias Klose wrote:
[...]
> another one many openstack packages.
[...]

Spot checking the source packages in the archive currently, it looks
like Thomas already has most of these done.

By way of background there, a coordinated effort has been underway
for the last several years to get all OpenStack software working
with recent Python 3 interpreters. The slowest part of that work
involved reaching out to the upstreams of (hundreds of) dependencies
not maintained within the OpenStack community and either helping
them get working Py3K support, adopting defunct libraries so
OpenStack contributors could fix them directly, or in some cases
abandoning/replacing dependencies with better-maintained
alternatives. This really is an ecosystem-wide effort, as complex
Python software doesn't generally run in isolation. I expect the
story for other large Python-based applications is very similar to
this.

Most OpenStack services and libraries are integration-tested
upstream to work under Python 3.5 today, but there are still many
Python-2.7-only testsuites for them (especially unit testing and
some functional tests) which need heavy refitting before the
community feels its Py3K support efforts are truly complete.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: python3 statsmodels?

2017-06-20 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko

On Tue, 20 Jun 2017, Sandro Tosi wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:18 AM, kamaraju kusumanchi
>  wrote:
> > I see that there is no statsmodels package for python3 in Stretch.

> > % apt-cache search statsmodels python3
> > python3-seaborn - statistical visualization library

> statsmodels is maintained by Debian science team
> (https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/statsmodels) so i suggest to contact
> them directly (CCed them here)

yeap -- would be lovely to have python3 build... debian/rules is quite
ad-hoc/elaborate but somewhat inline with how things are done for pandas
as well... I might look into it at some point (but not within upcoming 2
weeks) but would even more appreciate help from the team mates or
outside contributors ;)

Cheers
-- 
Yaroslav O. Halchenko
Center for Open Neuroscience http://centerforopenneuroscience.org
Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755
Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834   Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419
WWW:   http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik



Re: python3 statsmodels?

2017-06-20 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:18 AM, kamaraju kusumanchi
 wrote:
> I see that there is no statsmodels package for python3 in Stretch.
>
> % apt-cache search statsmodels python3
> python3-seaborn - statistical visualization library

statsmodels is maintained by Debian science team
(https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/statsmodels) so i suggest to contact
them directly (CCed them here)

-- 
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi



Re: Ad-hoc Debian Python BoF at PyCon US 2017

2017-06-20 Thread Matthias Klose
On 10.06.2017 05:32, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jun 06, 2017, at 10:57 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> 
>> if we plan (and it looks like we do) to support and distribute 2.7
>> with buster, why not support it *properly*? what's the point of
>> deprecating python2.7? either we ship it or not, but if we do then
>> let's not cripple it by removing python2 modules packages. do yo think
>> that just because the module i want to use is not available will make
>> realize "oh sh*t, let's migrate this 50k lines of code application to
>> py3k so that i can implement this 5-minutes-of-work-funcionality if i
>> had the module on py2"?
> 
> So what's the plan for when upstream stops supporting Python 2 in 2020?  Given
> the pronouncement at Pycon 2017 that maintenance will end at Pycon 2020, we
> really need to decide what Debian's official policy will be, and what the
> timeline will be to get there.
> 
> If Buster is 2 years in development, that means it will be the last Debian
> release before Python 2.7 is EOL'd.  Yes, I know it's possible that 2.7 will
> get security releases for some time after that, but that's a much reduced
> commitment from upstream.
> 
> Once upstream stops supporting 2.7, should we also stop supporting it?  That
> wouldn't mean that developers on Debian can't use Python 2.7, just that they
> will be on their own.  I know it sucks for people who can't port to Python 3,
> but if a decade or more isn't enough time to switch, then that's really saying
> they'll never switch, and how much responsibility does Debian have at that
> point?
> 
> Python 2.7 isn't going away today, but 3 years goes by quickly and we need to
> decide what our policy will be when the day arrives.

There's a big chunk of work getting the python2 dependencies replaced by python3
dependencies.  I think we should track these packages with bug reports, so that
every source package depending on python2 only, and not providing python3 binary
packages has it's own bug report. For now, one big cluster might be packages b-d
on python-sphinx instead of python3-sphinx, another one many openstack packages.

We can only speculate on the amount of work until we have such a list ...

Matthias



Interest in packaging python-dotenv?

2017-06-20 Thread Bastian Venthur

Dear Python-modules team,

is anyone interested (or already working on) packaging python-dotenv? 
From all *dotenv packages it is currently the most famous one for 
python. It allows for using .env files in python and provides a command 
line tool:


  https://github.com/theskumar/python-dotenv


Cheers,

Bastian