Re: Making py2dsp/pypi2deb the default tool to create Python-based packages in Debian
Am Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 10:09:05AM +0200 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> I was able to run
>
> py2dsp pystow
>
> with a sufficient result for my purposes...
While I've read here the suggestion to fetch the Tarball rather vom Github than
from pypi (and I agree with this) I would suggest to implement this suggestion
in what is planed to become a default tool. With the command above the watch
file points to pypi and thus I tried:
$ py2dsp --github pystow
/usr/bin/py2dsp:163: DeprecationWarning: There is no current event loop
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
E: py2dsp py2dsp:167: 404 {"message": "Not Found", "documentation_url":
"https://docs.github.com/rest"}
Since the original thread started with opinions to make the tool the default
tool I'd suggest waiting a bit until it
a) does not throw DeprecationWarnings
b) works out of the box for simple usage
IMHO the suggestions where it should be advertised are perfectly fine
but its a bit bad timing when people stumble over it and run into
trouble at first usage.
Thanks for working on such a promising tools anyway
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Re: Making py2dsp/pypi2deb the default tool to create Python-based packages in Debian
Hi Sandro,
I was able to run
py2dsp pystow
with a sufficient result for my purposes with the following patch:
diff --git a/pypi2deb/pypi.py b/pypi2deb/pypi.py
index 3e342c0..0639de3 100644
--- a/pypi2deb/pypi.py
+++ b/pypi2deb/pypi.py
@@ -38,8 +38,8 @@ log = logging.getLogger('pypi2deb')
@asyncio.coroutine
def get_pypi_info(name, version=None):
url = PYPI_JSON_URL + '/' + name
-if version:
-url += '/' + version
+# if version:
+# url += '/' + version
url += '/json'
session = None
try:
Since I do not really understand pypi2deb and what role version might have I do
not step further (MR or so) from this point but leave it to you to decide
whether
this is useful or not.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
pybuild-autopkgtest (was: Notes from the DC22 Python Team BoF)
On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 07:52:19PM +0200, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > == pybuild improvements == > > getting the autopkgtest MR in would be great > > https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/dh-python/-/merge_requests/27 > > We need people to test this MR some more, although it seems fairly mature. > > It might be a good idea to have a line in d/control to let us migrate from > the existing autopkgtests running unit tests to the new automated MR. I've been looking at this a bit more. I'm not sure what this last paragraph means: the new "automated" autopkgtest will only be run if the maintainer explicitly adds: Testsuite: autopkgtest-pkg-pybuild to debian/control (see the autodep8 MR at https://salsa.debian.org/ci-team/autodep8/-/merge_requests/27/diffs - it will never automatically detect a pybuild package). And a maintainer would presumably only add that if they are also removing their existing debian/tests/control (or want to run the pybuild tests in addition). An alternative would be for the autodep8 patch to try to determine whether to run pybuild-autopkgtest. One approach could be: if the package would run autopkgtest-pkg-python: if debian/control does not contain an override_dh_auto_test stanza: run pybuild-autopkgtest Note, though, that if autodep8 is called, it will run all of the detected tests. (At least that is what I believe happens from reading /usr/bin/autodep8; I haven't double-checked this.) So, for example, if a package specifies Testsuite: autopkgtest-pkg-python it will also run the autopkgtest-pkg-pybuild suite as it will be detected as being a Python package, and vice versa. That is a possible reason *not* to use the above suggestion, as it would potentially run pybuild-autopkgtest even if not desired. Best wishes, Julian
Re: Notes from the DC22 Python Team BoF
On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 07:52:19PM +0200, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > Hey folks, > > We had a Python Team BoF at DC22 earlier today and I thought relaying the > notes we took in gobby here would be a good idea. Thanks for the notes, Louis-Philippe, and sorry I couldn't join you! A few comments > -- > == python3.11 == > > python3.11 release has been delayed, from october 2022 to december 2022. > [...] My 2 cents' worth is as the 3.9->3.10 transition took several months, and was quite complicated, it is not wise to attempt the 3.10->3.11 before the freeze. We could then potentially go straight to 3.12 a few months after the bookworm freeze rather than going to 3.11 first. And that will probably be quite painful. > == pybuild improvements == > > getting the autopkgtest MR in would be great > > https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/dh-python/-/merge_requests/27 > > We need people to test this MR some more, although it seems fairly mature. > > It might be a good idea to have a line in d/control to let us migrate from > the existing autopkgtests running unit tests to the new automated MR. I'll take this to a separate email. > == lintian tags requests for the team == > > pollo will write you Python-related lintian tags. Ask him to. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1004746 :-) Julian
