Bug#988691: RFP: python-comment-parser -- extract comments from source code (Python)

2021-05-17 Thread Vagrant Cascadian
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-python@lists.debian.org, vagr...@debian.org

* Package name: python-comment-parser
  Version : 1.2.3
  Upstream Author : Jean-Ralph Aviles
* URL or Web page : https://github.com/jeanralphaviles/comment_parser
* License : Expat
  Description : extract comments from source code (Python)

 This Python module can be used to extract comments from source code in
 various languages. Supported languages include: C, C++/C#, Go, HTML,
 Java, Javascript, Python, Ruby, Shell, and XML.


I've made a quick packaging attempt that will soon be available at:

  https://salsa.debian.org/vagrant/python-comment-parser

I do not have a lot of experience packaging python modules, so if
someone with more experience and enthusiam for python packaging would
like to take this on, that would be great, as I don't forsee uploading
this to Debian myself; I'm packaging this for my own use at the moment,
but if I need to use it more maybe I'll take a more active interest...


live well,
  vagrant


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: Re: Challenges packaging Python for a Linux distro - at Python Language Summit

2021-05-17 Thread Brian May
Jeremy Stanley  writes:

> For software development work, I compile my own Python interpreters
> and libraries, because I need to develop against a variety of
> different versions of these, sometimes in chroots, to be able to
> target other distros and releases thereof. I keep all these in my
> homedir or otherwise outside of normal system-wide installation
> paths. Bear in mind that this isn't just a Debian problem, for
> decades Red Hat has also advised programmers not to rely on their
> /usr/bin/python for custom development because it is patched and
> tuned specifically for running system applications packaged for
> their distro and not intended as a general-purpose Python
> distribution.

There are tools that will help you do this. e.g. pyenv, asdf, etc.

But, yes, for my own software development, I gave up trying to use
Debian python packages years ago, because I found I was spending way
more time trying to package the required dependencies (and dependencies
of dependencies of dependencies) then I spending developing my
application. This gets even worse if you want to support rpm based
distributions. Plus the fact that I was becoming increasingly concerned
that if I upgraded library python3-L for application A, I might
accidentally break applications B, C, and D also, and testing/fixing
everything at the same time not really feasible. So now I use asdf +
poetry/virtualenvs now, plus Docker for distribution.

As a result, I can upgrade the dependencies in each application one
application at a time. If an application breaks, I just need to fix that
one application, without breaking everything else at the same time. I
can upgrade the OS distribution, and not be concerned (mostly anyway)
that it will break my applications in weird and wonderful ways that I
could not predict.

This isn't so useful for distribution of Python based desktop
applications, but I don't do a lot of that (and probably would be
looking for a good off-the-shelf solution if I did).
-- 
Brian May 



Request to join the Python Team

2021-05-17 Thread Carsten Schoenert
Hi,

I'd like to join the Python team on Salsa.

Recently I've taken over the maintainer ship for flask-sqlalchemy
together with a long time businesses partner I'm working together with
on my day job.

And some more packages are to come I want to work on.

For another Django based project we needed to get
python-django-crispy-forms-foundation packaged. I'm testing currently
the prepared Debian packages on this.

My username on Salsa is tijuca. Thanks!

-- 
Regards
Carsten



Re: Request to join python team

2021-05-17 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Sérgio (2021.05.11_22:15:20_+)
> I would like to join the Debian Python team to help maintain typer and 
> crochet.
> 
> My Salsa login is sergiosacj.
> 
> I have read 
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst
>  and accept it.

Added, welcome.

SR

-- 
Stefano Rivera
  http://tumbleweed.org.za/
  +1 415 683 3272



Re: Request to join the Python team

2021-05-17 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Roland (2021.05.17_16:20:19_+)
> So I hereby request to be added to the python-team group on salsa. My
> salsa login is "lolando", and I have read and accept the
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst
> policy.

Added, welcome to the team.

-- 
Stefano Rivera
  http://tumbleweed.org.za/
  +1 415 683 3272



Re: Request to join Debian Python Team

2021-05-17 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Joseph (2021.05.17_03:26:14_+)
> My Salsa username: @njoseph (https://salsa.debian.org/njoseph)
> 
> I hereby declare that I have read the Policy document of the Debian Python
> Team at 
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst
> and that I accept it.

Added, welcome.

SR

-- 
Stefano Rivera
  http://tumbleweed.org.za/
  +1 415 683 3272



Re: request to join the team

2021-05-17 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Felix (2021.05.14_16:02:53_+)
> My salsa login: obfusk
> I have read and accepted 
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst

Welcome, added to the team.

SR

-- 
Stefano Rivera
  http://tumbleweed.org.za/
  +1 415 683 3272



Request to join the Python team

2021-05-17 Thread Roland Mas

Hi everyone,

I've been contracted by Synchrotron Soleil to work on the packaging of 
Jupyterhub and its dependencies. This turns out to about 20 Python 
packages, most of which should probably go under the Debian Python Team 
umbrella (although some may go into Debian Science). So I hereby request 
to be added to the python-team group on salsa. My salsa login is 
"lolando", and I have read and accept the 
https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst 
policy.


Thanks, and see you soon for improving Debian :-)

Roland.



Re: Challenges packaging Python for a Linux distro - at Python Language Summit

2021-05-17 Thread Thomas Goirand
Hi Luke,

First, I'd like you to know I feel sorry to read how much you seem
affected by what you describe below. Hopefully, you'll find a viable
solution soon, and hopefully, we may help.

However, please try to understand what others are telling. The solution
you're looking for is probably not the one you expect, but I'm convince
it does exist (ie: venv, probably, or better dependency management). See
below.

On 5/17/21 8:10 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> All the horrors that you are painting after this paragraph, are due to
>> the fact that you aren't doing "apt-get dist-upgrade". I'm having a hard
>> time understanding why you're both:
>> - not doing "apt-get dist-upgrade"
> 
> because precisely the difficulties encountered, and due to software 
> development
> that critically requires more recent variants of what is typically in
> debian/stable
> i.e. usually a minimum of one even three years out-of-date.
> 
> a dist-upgrade to debian / testing - a way to obtain the latest
> variants of critical
> software - frequently resulted in massive breakage.

Massive breakage of what? Your own Python code? Well, it's up to you to
stay current to whatever version is in Testing/Unstable. If you don't do
it, then it's your responsibility, and you must live with the
consequences of it.

Yes, it's a massive undertaking to always stay up-to-date, and drains a
lot of energy, though no choice if you're serious with what you're doing...

> i quickly learned never to attempt that again given the massive disruption
> it caused to me being able to earn money as a software engineer.

So, to "earn money as a software engineer", you prefer your software to
rely on older, probably buggy, and not security supported, dependencies?
I'm sorry, but that's far from best practice, and it will bite hard anyways.

Yes, dependency management is a hard work. Yes, it takes some of your
time (sometimes massively). No, you can't avoid it...

>> - complaining that it's breaking your system
> 
> ah, you're missing the point by focussing on the background and context.

Are you *SURE* that you're the only person that's right, and that the
dozen experienced Debian Developers saying the opposite way are the
wrong persons? I would strongly advise you to reconsider.

Do you completely understand how "library transitions" are working in
Debian? If not, I would strongly advise you to read about it.

> i would prefer to solicit some
> responses that acknowledge that this is an actual problem that needs
> solving.

Well, it feels like the only thing you accept, is the answer that *YOU*
want, and not the one that others are telling you. Chances that it's
going to happen are very thin, since we all know that what you're
discussing is not the way Debian works.

> Bryan's message unfortunately is a repeat of prior experiences
> in reporting this issue over the years.

Looks like a lot of people told you the same thing...
Do you sometimes listen to what others tell? :)

> Brian May wrote:
>> A rolling type update might be convenient, but it is not supported by
>> Debian, and has not been supported by Debian in sometime. There are
>> complexities in such an arrangement, and it is difficult to test such
>> arrangements will work as expected. Such an arrangement is not
>> guaranteed or tested to work.
> 
> Brian: as an experienced debian systems administrator and python
> developer I'm not asking for help with either, and over the past 20 years
> have successfully learned and deployed the techniques required to
> keep a rolling system operational

Apparently, you haven't...

> like Thomas, you are missing the point by focussing on the context
> and background material rather than focussing on the problem.

We aren't at all missing the point that doing the way you're doing is
often breaking your system.

The problem: you're expecting that never doing "apt-get dist-upgrade"
will handle library transitions, when this isn't the way Debian works.

We're all telling you, but you do not want to listen, and insist that
what you've been doing (wrongly) for 20 years is the correct way of
doing things. Sorry, but it's not... You *will* experience breakage, and
there's nothing we can do to save you.

> this was also the tack taken by others when i explained the problem:
> "it's your own fault, this isn't supported, therefore we don't have to
> do anything, therefore it's not a bug, therefore the bugreport is
> summarily dismissed".

Which is 100% correct.

> in my report, if you read it again carefully, i specifically stated that
> *multiple debian maintainers* are receiving *multiple complaints* of
> breakage and disruption due to the standard debhelper-python
> build system not following the "safe" practice outlined by
> numpy and sci-py.

The problem isn't the build system, which is doing things the correct
way. Any "arch: any" package linked against Python *must* be upgraded
together with the interpreter itself when it transition from Unstable to
Testing. 

Bug#988658: RFP: python3-pyupgrade -- Automatically upgrade syntax for newer versions of the Python language

2021-05-17 Thread Raphael Hertzog
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-python@lists.debian.org

* Package name: python3-pyupgrade
  Version : 2.16.0
  Upstream Author : Anthony Sottile 
* URL : https://github.com/asottile/pyupgrade
* License : BSD
  Programming Lang: Python
  Description : Automatically upgrade syntax for newer versions of the 
Python language

This helper script can help you normalize your Python source code
by rewriting parts of your code to use the latest syntax improvements.

Some examples from the README:

set([])  # set()

'{0} {1}'.format(1, 2)# '{} {}'.format(1, 2)

x is 5  # x == 5

'{foo} {bar}'.format(foo=foo, bar=bar)  # f'{foo} {bar}'


I discovered this tool by reading some documentation and I'd like
it to be available in Debian so that I can try it and use it :-)

ccing debian-python@lists.debian.org in the hope to catch the attention of
someone with more time than me.

Thank you!

-- 
Raphaël Hertzog



Re: Re: Challenges packaging Python for a Linux distro - at Python Language Summit

2021-05-17 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2021-05-17 07:10:39 +0100 (+0100), Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> (apologies i forgot to say, please do cc me
[...]

Done.

> a dist-upgrade to debian / testing - a way to obtain the latest
> variants of critical software - frequently resulted in massive
> breakage.
> 
> i quickly learned never to attempt that again given the massive
> disruption it caused to me being able to earn money as a software
> engineer.
[...]

You're probably just going to see this as further confirmation of
your opinion, or yet another person telling you that you're doing it
wrong, but as someone who also writes rather a lot of Python
programs for a living I learned long ago to not develop against the
"system" on any platform. I use sid/unstable for my development
systems, but I consider the python3 package in it to have two uses:
Testing new packages of software which are targeting a future Debian
stable release, and running other packaged things which are already
part of Debian.

For software development work, I compile my own Python interpreters
and libraries, because I need to develop against a variety of
different versions of these, sometimes in chroots, to be able to
target other distros and releases thereof. I keep all these in my
homedir or otherwise outside of normal system-wide installation
paths. Bear in mind that this isn't just a Debian problem, for
decades Red Hat has also advised programmers not to rely on their
/usr/bin/python for custom development because it is patched and
tuned specifically for running system applications packaged for
their distro and not intended as a general-purpose Python
distribution.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: Challenges packaging Python for a Linux distro - at Python Language Summit

2021-05-17 Thread Matthias Klose
On 5/16/21 1:52 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> * One 3.x version at a time. Doesn't line up with cpython's support terms.

> numpy and sci-py, the two "best known" debian python software
> packages, have known about this for a long, long, time.  they
> quietly solved it by adding explicit building of **MULTIPLE**
> versions of numpy-3.5, numpy-3.6, numpy-3.7, etc. etc.

> i leave you with these insights.  there *is* a solution: do what numpy and
> sci-py do.

I don't understand why you are pointing to numpy and scipy as good examples.
The modules are not built in any different way from all the modules shipped in
Debian.

Matthias



Re: Re: Challenges packaging Python for a Linux distro - at Python Language Summit

2021-05-17 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
(apologies i forgot to say, please do cc me, i am using the list
archives reply-to
links at https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2021/05/msg00036.html)

Thomas Goirand  wrote:

> All the horrors that you are painting after this paragraph, are due to
> the fact that you aren't doing "apt-get dist-upgrade". I'm having a hard
> time understanding why you're both:
> - not doing "apt-get dist-upgrade"

because precisely the difficulties encountered, and due to software development
that critically requires more recent variants of what is typically in
debian/stable
i.e. usually a minimum of one even three years out-of-date.

a dist-upgrade to debian / testing - a way to obtain the latest
variants of critical
software - frequently resulted in massive breakage.

i quickly learned never to attempt that again given the massive disruption
it caused to me being able to earn money as a software engineer.

> - complaining that it's breaking your system

ah, you're missing the point by focussing on the background and context.
also, i didn't "complain" (despite it causing distress for some considerable
number of years), i would have said, "i have a complaint" and stopped
at that, rather than moved on to describe the details of what the root cause
is.

> Could you care to explain? This makes absolutely no sense.

i could - but doing so is a distraction. i would prefer to solicit some
responses that acknowledge that this is an actual problem that needs
solving.

Bryan's message unfortunately is a repeat of prior experiences
in reporting this issue over the years.

> By the way, since you're never doing "apt-get dist-upgrade", it means
> your system is full of security issues that aren't getting fixed.
> Hopefully, the computer system(s) you're talking about isn't connected
> to internet, right?

indeed.  it's a development laptop on which i am critically reliant for
financial income and for furthering free software.

Brian May wrote:

> A rolling type update might be convenient, but it is not supported by
> Debian, and has not been supported by Debian in sometime. There are
> complexities in such an arrangement, and it is difficult to test such
> arrangements will work as expected. Such an arrangement is not
> guaranteed or tested to work.

Brian: as an experienced debian systems administrator and python
developer I'm not asking for help with either, and over the past 20 years
have successfully learned and deployed the techniques required to
keep a rolling system operational, in order to keep my business
operational and not lose money due to massive downtime either
from having to transfer 10 million source code files from laptop to
laptop, or from having to perform disaster recovery due to breakage.

like Thomas, you are missing the point by focussing on the context
and background material rather than focussing on the problem.

this was also the tack taken by others when i explained the problem:
"it's your own fault, this isn't supported, therefore we don't have to
do anything, therefore it's not a bug, therefore the bugreport is
summarily dismissed".

in my report, if you read it again carefully, i specifically stated that
*multiple debian maintainers* are receiving *multiple complaints* of
breakage and disruption due to the standard debhelper-python
build system not following the "safe" practice outlined by
numpy and sci-py.

i can only surmise that they probably don't want to say anything
because the message being sent to them on summary closure
of bugreports is that, well, "nobody cares".

what i can say is that they're getting pretty fed up of constantly
having to close bugreports, every time someone raises this
issue, that's pretty clear from what they didn't say, if you know
what i mean.

once this is accepted as actually being a problem that needs solving,
rather than being avoided because "it's not supported, you're on your
own, not our problem", i am happy to help advise and discuss
solutions.

given that this has been ongoing for 10 years now i have been giving
it some thought for a long, long time.

however before getting to a discussion of solutions i would prefer
to see acknowledgement that it is recognised as a problem that
people actively wish to see fixed.  otherwise i will have to wait patiently
for the next disaster situation to occur, or, sadly, after 20 years of
using debian, and remaining loyal to it despite maltreatment, i will
have to find an alternative distro.

what is stopping me from doing that is the severe financial consequences
involved and risk to myself and my family due to my income being
far below average.  the downtime that would result is a huge risk,
plus learning a new distro also compromises my effectiveness which
also results in further lost income.

what i am saying is: this is serious - i am effectlvely financially
trapped and critically dependent on the decisions that you make,
even though i am not paying you money for the work that you do.

l.