Re: Test suite in github but missing from pypi tarballs

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

> csvkit https://github.com/onyxfish/csvkit

Done, just waiting for a new pypi release. See
https://github.com/wireservice/csvkit/issues/20

> django-jinja   https://github.com/niwibe/django-jinja

Upstream not interested, claims the tests are hard to run.
https://github.com/niwinz/django-jinja/issues/135

> dockerpty  https://github.com/d11wtq/dockerpty

https://github.com/d11wtq/dockerpty/pull/21

> pdfrw  https://github.com/pmaupin/pdfrw

https://github.com/pmaupin/pdfrw/pull/53

> pep8-naminghttps://github.com/flintwork/pep8-naming

https://github.com/PyCQA/pep8-naming/pull/24

> pkgconfig  https://github.com/matze/pkgconfig

https://github.com/PyCQA/pep8-naming/pull/24

> pydot  https://github.com/erocarrera/pydot

https://github.com/erocarrera/pydot/pull/120

> pylast http://github.com/pylast/pylast

https://github.com/pylast/pylast/pull/169

> pysrt  https://github.com/byroot/pysrt

https://github.com/byroot/pysrt/issues/42
https://github.com/byroot/pysrt/pull/59

> python-argshttps://github.com/kennethreitz/args

https://github.com/kennethreitz/args/pull/19

> python-astor   https://github.com/berkerpeksag/astor

https://github.com/berkerpeksag/astor/pull/52

> python-cachecontrolhttps://github.com/ionrock/cachecontrol

https://github.com/ionrock/cachecontrol/pull/120

> python-easywebdav  https://github.com/amnong/easywebdav

https://github.com/amnong/easywebdav/pull/47

> python-gnutls  https://github.com/AGProjects/python-gnutls

https://github.com/AGProjects/python-gnutls/pull/1

> python-hpilo   https://github.com/seveas/python-hpilo

https://github.com/seveas/python-hpilo/pull/112

> python-humanizehttps://github.com/jmoiron/humanize

https://github.com/jmoiron/humanize/issues/33
https://github.com/jmoiron/humanize/pull/34

> python-jsonpifyhttps://github.com/wcdolphin/flask-jsonpify

https://github.com/corydolphin/flask-jsonpify/pull/13

> txws   https://github.com/MostAwesomeDude/txWS

https://github.com/MostAwesomeDude/txWS/pull/29

> vcversionerhttps://github.com/habnabit/vcversioner

https://github.com/habnabit/vcversioner/pull/7

> whichcraft https://github.com/pydanny/whichcraft

https://github.com/pydanny/whichcraft/pull/1

-- 
Edward.



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/setup.py 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