Re: Offer to help with packaging
El 7/1/20 a las 10:58 PM, Nicholas D Steeves escribió: > [] > If you're committed to packaging python lsp, then set yourself as the > owner of #96360, and retitle it, replacing "RFP" with "ITP". > > If the absence of a python-jsonrpc-server package is a blocker for > #963605, and you want to work on it, then file an ITP for > python-jsonrpc-server, set yourself as owner, and also set up a blocks > relationship between the two bugs. > [] > Control: command -1 arguments > > "-1" is a convenient alias for the bug number. For more info, see the > man bts(1), the server-control documentation, and Developer's Reference: > > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ > > > Cheers, > Nicholas New ITP submited https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=964497 I hope to finish this package as soon as possible so that the Python IDE Spyder process can continue to its latest version. Regards Pablo
Re: Python3 -dbg packages
Hi Matthias! On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:33:39PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > Python 3.8 upstream now has a common ABI for normal and debug extension > builds, so it is technically possible to load a debug extension in > the normal interpreter, or to load a normal extension in the debug > interpreter. Packages from the PyQt5 stack (pyqt5, pyqt5chart, pyqt5webengine, qscintilla2) have recently started to use PEP 384 limited ABI (the built files are named *.abi3.so). However, when a debug interpreter is used for build, the build system disables this feature and builds a normal *.cpython-38d-*.so file: https://riverbankcomputing.com/hg/sip/file/6169324910f8/sipbuild/buildable.py#l60 Because of this, I decided to still build -dbg versions for these packages. Do you know how much the -dbg interpreter is compatible with *.abi3.so files? I just checked, and apparently it can import them, but maybe there is some benefit in keeping the normal debug versions too? -- Dmitry Shachnev signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Timing of Python upstream and Debian releases
Hi, po 6. 7. 2020 v 21:04 odesílatel Matthias Klose napsal: > So what I'm proposing here is to aim to support 3.9 as early as possible > as a > supported Python3 version, starting with the 3.9 upstream release, and > fixing > stuff on the go. Then decide in November, if we can do the defaults > change to > 3.9, or if we drop 3.9 again, or ship with two supported Python3 versions. > +1 for this proposal. -- Best regards Ondřej Nový
Re: pybuild vs os-pkg-tools [was: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team]
Hi, po 6. 7. 2020 v 11:09 odesílatel Thomas Goirand napsal: > This isn't about hating or loving pybuild. This is all about being able > to control how this set of packages are build globally (the whole set of > packages. so you could wrap these global things around pybuild, right? -- Best regards Ondřej Nový
