ITP: Name for real python-pgsql module
Hello All, I'm not DD, but I would like to make Debian package with python-pgsql module [1]. I need it for PostgreSQL support for Courier-Pythonfilter framework [2]. It has been debianized by Frederik Dannemare [3] and still waits for sponsoring at mentors.d.n site [4]. The problem with python-pgsql module is that Debian has package with the same name for long time, but it's different Python module! Its real name is pypgsql [5]. So my question is: what should I call that package? python-pypgsql? ;) My best regards, Pawel [1] http://people.rpath.com/~gafton/pgsql/ [2] http://phantom.dragonsdawn.net/~gordon/courier-pythonfilter/ [3] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=504080 [4] http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/courier-pythonfilter/ [5] http://pypgsql.sourceforge.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITP: Name for real python-pgsql module
[Paweł Tęcza, 2008-12-18 10:49] I'm not DD, but I would like to make Debian package with python-pgsql module [1]. I need it for PostgreSQL support for Courier-Pythonfilter framework [2]. It has been debianized by Frederik Dannemare [3] and still waits for sponsoring at mentors.d.n site [4]. The problem with python-pgsql module is that Debian has package with the same name for long time, but it's different Python module! Its real name is pypgsql [5]. So my question is: what should I call that package? python-pypgsql? ;) Will it be a problem to use psycopg2 instead? If these two libraries are compatible (they should provide the same api, no?), just use psycopg2. You can check it by changing filters/TtlDb.py lines 59-60 into: import psycopg2 self.dbapi = psycopg2 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: [Python-modules-team] ITP: python-pivy -- Coin binding for Python
[Teemu Ikonen, 2008-12-13] http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/pivy.git;a=summary [...] The package is in a 'works for me' state and lintian clean, but there may be something I missed. I'm not sure if I should build the C extensions with than one python version, now they are built just for the default python version. * please build it for all supported Python versions (pyversions -vs) [1] * add -dbg package [1] * why not Priority: optional? * optional: (required if I will be the one who uploads it ;) + remove the 0.5.0~svn2008.12.11-1 changelog entry and + rename 0.3.0-1 into 0.5.0~svn2008.12.11-1 (or mark 0.3.0-1 as UNRELEASED) * missing dependencies (Depends/Recommends/Suggests): + python-qt4* (-common?) + python-qt4-gl + python-opengl * how about adding a -doc package and installing (among other docs) examples there? * there's a local Scons in the upstream sources, make sure Debian's one is used Pleas note that I didn't build it as libsoqt4-dev's required version is still not available, any progres on this one? [1] see jinja2 package for an example -- -=[ Piotr Ożarowski ]=- -=[ http://www.ozarowski.pl ]=- pgp4ClGVPnLnm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: python-pytc
[Vernon Tang, 2008-12-18] Now that I'm a member of the PMPT, I've committed python-pytc to svn. Could someone take a look at it? * why not Priority: optional? * please build -dbg package * consider using debhelper7's command sequencer (man dh) instead of CDBS, it will be easier to build -dbg package without CDBS, IMHO * add Vcs-Svn and Vcs-Browser fields * did you send patches upstream? -- -=[ Piotr Ożarowski ]=- -=[ http://www.ozarowski.pl ]=- pgp9QwhG1IVyY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: numpy 1.2.1, switching to git?
/me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well bzr... (note: I use bzr for all of my other projects, so I have a vested interest) However... _anything_ is an improvement over svn. Monty Piotr Ożarowski wrote: [Ondrej Certik, 2008-12-08] P.S. bzed, POX, isn't it time to move our packaging to git? I was planing it for a long time, but never found time to actually do it. If you volunteer to do this, please send a message to PAPT mailing list, wait a week and if no one will complain, go ahead and convert the repository. Then we'll test it for a bit and if it will work fine, we'll do the same with DPMT repo (which has more developers so we'll use hey, it's working perfectly fine in PAPT argument ;). BTW, I'm Piotr or Piotrek outside IRC ;-P -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: [RFR] urlwatch
[Adeodato Simó, 2008-12-18] * Piotr Ożarowski [Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:06:35 +0100]: You can even install it as /usr/share/urlwatch/urlwatch.py (but still symlink it without the extension) - this way you'll have additional .pyc file which will speed urlwatch a little bit AFAIK, .pyc files are only for imported modules, and never for executed scripts. They are certainly not created by default, and strace does not show them being used either. that's why I wrote to install it as /usr/share/urlwatch/urlwatch.py (note the additional extension). (Plus you wouldn't want .pyc files in /usr/share/package anyway AFAIK.) lots of packages are installing .py files into /usr/share/something (IMHO all Python applications should do this and thus not pollute global namespace) and pycentral/pysupport handles it fine. -- -=[ Piotr Ożarowski ]=- -=[ http://www.ozarowski.pl ]=- pgpOn0qBLaHOG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [RFR] urlwatch
* Piotr Ożarowski [Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:46:36 +0100]: [Adeodato Simó, 2008-12-18] * Piotr Ożarowski [Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:06:35 +0100]: You can even install it as /usr/share/urlwatch/urlwatch.py (but still symlink it without the extension) - this way you'll have additional .pyc file which will speed urlwatch a little bit AFAIK, .pyc files are only for imported modules, and never for executed scripts. They are certainly not created by default, and strace does not show them being used either. that's why I wrote to install it as /usr/share/urlwatch/urlwatch.py (note the additional extension). Yes, I got that. You mean: /usr/bin/urlwatch - /usr/share/urlwatch/urlwatch.py But even with that, strace does not show that a /usr/share/urlwatch/urlwatch.pyc file would get used when invoking urlwatch. (Plus you wouldn't want .pyc files in /usr/share/package anyway AFAIK.) lots of packages are installing .py files into /usr/share/something (IMHO all Python applications should do this and thus not pollute global namespace) and pycentral/pysupport handles it fine. Oh, sure. I (1) agree applications should put files un /usr/share/name, and (2) I meant you wouldn't want .pyc files there as in if you don't use pycentral of pysupport, sorry for the confusion. -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org A conference is a gathering of important people who singly can do nothing but together can decide that nothing can be done. -- Fred Allen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: [RFR] urlwatch
[Adeodato Simó, 2008-12-18] Yes, I got that. You mean: /usr/bin/urlwatch - /usr/share/urlwatch/urlwatch.py But even with that, strace does not show that a /usr/share/urlwatch/urlwatch.pyc file would get used when invoking urlwatch. oh, right, thanks -- -=[ Piotr Ożarowski ]=- -=[ http://www.ozarowski.pl ]=- pgpxr8rf0c9hG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: numpy 1.2.1, switching to git?
Ondrej Certik wrote: On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Monty Taylor mo...@inaugust.com wrote: /me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well bzr... (note: I use bzr for all of my other projects, so I have a vested interest) However... _anything_ is an improvement over svn. Matthias also wrote me offlist, that he either prefers to stay in svn, or use bzr, but not git (if I understood well). git seems to be fairly polarizing - I'm not sure why. :) The problem with bzr is that it seems to me it is mainly used in Ubuntu, but that's about it. Also compare for example the number of packages in the respective vcs: http://bzr.debian.org/ http://git.debian.org/ http://hg.debian.org/ (git seems to me like a clear winner) Well, I don't mind either, I know both hg and git quite well and bzr a little. But I prefer to just use just one vcs for everything, and that is git in my case, as I think it has the biggest momentum now. Seems like a decent enough rationale... I'm pretty-much fine with any of them. This will give me a chance to learn a bit about git. Monty -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
