Re: Test suite in github but missing from pypi tarballs

2016-04-23 Thread Edward Betts
Here is the progress for each package.

> csvkit

Done, just waiting for a new pypi release. See

> django-jinja

Upstream not interested, claims the tests are hard to run.

> dockerpty

> pdfrw

> pep8-naming

> pkgconfig

> pydot

> pylast

> pysrt

> python-args

> python-astor

> python-cachecontrol

> python-easywebdav

> python-gnutls

> python-hpilo

> python-humanize

> python-jsonpify

> txws

> vcversioner

> whichcraft


Re: python-mkdocs new dependancy

2016-04-23 Thread Brian May
Piotr O┼╝arowski  writes:

> [Brian May, 2016-04-18]
>> Sorry, I don't quite understand. How will this help with the fact that
>> mkdocs-bootswatch is listed as a requirement, but we don't have
>> mkdocs-bootswatch in Debian?
> FTR: using not packaged version of mkdocs-bootswatch is not an option,
> but that's obvious, right?

Sorry, still not clear what you intend me to do.

I notice that the three packages have different release cycles.

mkdocs 0.15.1
mkdocs-bootswatch 0.1.0
mkdocs-bootstrap 0.1.1

So I think it is probably a good idea to have three seperate Debian
source packages and three seperate binary packages.

It looks like both mkdocs-bootswatch and mkdocs-bootstrap contain
non-Python code.

So instead of installing these using pybuild/ I could install
them in /usr/share/mkdocs/themes/mkdocs-bootswatch and
/usr/share/mkdocs/themes/mkdocs-bootstrap instead.

Then I need to patch mkdocs to look for files in this directory instead
of using Python's setuptools mechanism.

Does this match what you are thinking?
Brian May