Re: Request to join team
Hi Robie (2023.02.05_20:47:01_+) > I'd like to join the team. Right now I'd like to just fix > python-service-identity in order to fix an FTBFS in one of my packages > (python-trustme, bug 1030487). It just needs a cherry-pick of > https://github.com/pyca/service-identity/commit/705f4af829adf4d1b6e44250d8039635a73199d5, > but it's about time I joined the team and did it. Added, welcome! SR -- Stefano Rivera http://tumbleweed.org.za/ +1 415 683 3272
Re: Request for joining the team
Hi Danial (2023.01.15_09:54:38_+) > I am Danial Behzadi and I want to join Debian Python Team to maintain > package [python-fire](1) through this team as that's an orphaned > dependency of my current package [tractor](2) as [requested](3) by DDs. Added, sorry about the delay, welcome. SR -- Stefano Rivera http://tumbleweed.org.za/ +1 415 683 3272
Request to join team
I'd like to join the team. Right now I'd like to just fix python-service-identity in order to fix an FTBFS in one of my packages (python-trustme, bug 1030487). It just needs a cherry-pick of https://github.com/pyca/service-identity/commit/705f4af829adf4d1b6e44250d8039635a73199d5, but it's about time I joined the team and did it. Longer term, I'd like to add the team as at least uploader, if not maintainer, to some of my packages, but I will need to ensure they comply with policy first (move them over to Salsa, etc). My Salsa login is rbasak. I have read https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst and I accept it. Thanks, Robie
Re: Python 3.10 in bookworm
Hi Michael, On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 02:29:10PM +0100, Michael Kesper wrote: > Hi Julian, > > Am 05.02.23 um 11:38 schrieb Julian Gilbey: > > Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in > > bookworm? > > Because it would amount to about double the work for all those involved. I doubt it would be double the work, but as Scott points out in his email, it would require paying attention to security issues in the Python interpreter for both the 3.10 and 3.11 interpreters. I had not considered that. > Besides, Python 3.11 has some points for it: > - Real performance gains for real workloads > - It will be supported one year longer (so EOL is expected to be around the > time bookworm will be out of stable, too). I'm not proposing that we revert to Python 3.10 as default for bookworm, only that we have the python3.10 package itself in bookworm. > > I was trying to run some experiments in a virtual environment a few > > days ago, and it turns out that several of the Python packages I > > needed do not yet run on Python 3.11. I was saved by being able to > > run in a Python 3.10 venv and download all the required packages from > > PyPI. If bookworm shipped without python3.10, I would not have been > > able to do my work. Removing python3.10 from bookworm will seriously > > affect many of our users in a similar situation to me. > ... > > P.S. We should also fix #1036268 if we do keep python3.10 in bookworm; > > I'm happy to do an NMU if needed. > > Maybe you could sponsor a "backport" of Python3.11? I don't understand this suggestion. #1036268 says that running "python3.10 -m venv envname" if the python3.10-venv package is not installed should output a meaningful error message rather than crash with an "undefined variable" error. Best wishes, Julian
Re: Python 3.10 in bookworm
On February 5, 2023 5:22:33 PM UTC, Julian Gilbey wrote: >On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 02:41:08PM +, Stefano Rivera wrote: >> Hi Julian (2023.02.05_10:38:23_+) >> >> > Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in >> > bookworm? >> >> Because we aim to have a single Python release supported in every stable >> release. > >I am not suggesting that we revert to having Python 3.10 as a >"supported version" (that would be a whole separate discussion); I am >suggesting that we keep just the Python 3.10 interpreter and >python3.10-venv in bookworm, so that users can use it to run a virtual >environment if they need to do so. That would narrow the impact, but it's not free either. The interpreter packages often need post-release support from the maintainer and the security team. Someone would also have to triage all the bug reports associated with Debian user expectations for a Python version in Debian not being met. Scott K
Re: Python 3.10 in bookworm
On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 02:41:08PM +, Stefano Rivera wrote: > Hi Julian (2023.02.05_10:38:23_+) > > > Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in > > bookworm? > > Because we aim to have a single Python release supported in every stable > release. I am not suggesting that we revert to having Python 3.10 as a "supported version" (that would be a whole separate discussion); I am suggesting that we keep just the Python 3.10 interpreter and python3.10-venv in bookworm, so that users can use it to run a virtual environment if they need to do so. > > I was trying to run some experiments in a virtual environment a few > > days ago, and it turns out that several of the Python packages I > > needed do not yet run on Python 3.11. I was saved by being able to > > run in a Python 3.10 venv and download all the required packages from > > PyPI. If bookworm shipped without python3.10, I would not have been > > able to do my work. Removing python3.10 from bookworm will seriously > > affect many of our users in a similar situation to me. > > By the time bookworm releases, that probably won't be the case any more. I honestly don't know if that will be the case or not; some packages will be much slower to adapt than others. That's why I'm suggesting we leave the python3.10 and python3.10-venv packages in bookworm. > But anything that gets removed from Debian, because it isn't ready yet > obviously gets hurt in the process... I'm not sure what you mean here? Best wishes, Julian
Re: Python 3.10 in bookworm
Hi Julian (2023.02.05_10:38:23_+) > Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in > bookworm? Because we aim to have a single Python release supported in every stable release. > I was trying to run some experiments in a virtual environment a few > days ago, and it turns out that several of the Python packages I > needed do not yet run on Python 3.11. I was saved by being able to > run in a Python 3.10 venv and download all the required packages from > PyPI. If bookworm shipped without python3.10, I would not have been > able to do my work. Removing python3.10 from bookworm will seriously > affect many of our users in a similar situation to me. By the time bookworm releases, that probably won't be the case any more. But anything that gets removed from Debian, because it isn't ready yet obviously gets hurt in the process... SR -- Stefano Rivera http://tumbleweed.org.za/ +1 415 683 3272
Re: Python 3.10 in bookworm
Hi Julian, Am 05.02.23 um 11:38 schrieb Julian Gilbey: Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in bookworm? Because it would amount to about double the work for all those involved. Besides, Python 3.11 has some points for it: - Real performance gains for real workloads - It will be supported one year longer (so EOL is expected to be around the time bookworm will be out of stable, too). I was trying to run some experiments in a virtual environment a few days ago, and it turns out that several of the Python packages I needed do not yet run on Python 3.11. I was saved by being able to run in a Python 3.10 venv and download all the required packages from PyPI. If bookworm shipped without python3.10, I would not have been able to do my work. Removing python3.10 from bookworm will seriously affect many of our users in a similar situation to me. ... P.S. We should also fix #1036268 if we do keep python3.10 in bookworm; I'm happy to do an NMU if needed. Maybe you could sponsor a "backport" of Python3.11? My 2 cents Michael
Re: Python 3.10 in bookworm
Our social contract #4 says "Our priorities are our users and free software". What benefits would having the python3.10 base packages in bookworm bring for our users (as I point out, for some users, this is a necessity) and what disadvantages would it bring (none that I can think of)? Why would we tell a whole bunch of our users: "Don't upgrade to Debian 12 until all of the critical packages you use from PyPI are upgraded to support Python 3.11, or fix those packages yourself"? And may I politely remind you, Thomas, that you are very concerned about breaking things for people: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=973617#40 This is likely a far greater impact than the discussion there on many more people. Best wishes, Julian On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 12:25:18PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote: > How about fixing the 3.11 issues if you hit them ? How about using Buster and > 3.9 if 3.11 doesn't work (yet) for you ? > > Thomas Goirand (zigo) > On Feb 5, 2023 11:38, Julian Gilbey wrote: > > > > Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in > > bookworm? > > > > I was trying to run some experiments in a virtual environment a few > > days ago, and it turns out that several of the Python packages I > > needed do not yet run on Python 3.11. I was saved by being able to > > run in a Python 3.10 venv and download all the required packages from > > PyPI. If bookworm shipped without python3.10, I would not have been > > able to do my work. Removing python3.10 from bookworm will seriously > > affect many of our users in a similar situation to me. > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Julian > > > > P.S. We should also fix #1036268 if we do keep python3.10 in bookworm; > > I'm happy to do an NMU if needed.
Re: Python 3.10 in bookworm
How about fixing the 3.11 issues if you hit them ? How about using Buster and 3.9 if 3.11 doesn't work (yet) for you ? Thomas Goirand (zigo) On Feb 5, 2023 11:38, Julian Gilbey wrote: > > Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in > bookworm? > > I was trying to run some experiments in a virtual environment a few > days ago, and it turns out that several of the Python packages I > needed do not yet run on Python 3.11. I was saved by being able to > run in a Python 3.10 venv and download all the required packages from > PyPI. If bookworm shipped without python3.10, I would not have been > able to do my work. Removing python3.10 from bookworm will seriously > affect many of our users in a similar situation to me. > > Best wishes, > > Julian > > P.S. We should also fix #1036268 if we do keep python3.10 in bookworm; > I'm happy to do an NMU if needed. >
Python 3.10 in bookworm
Why is the current intention not to ship the python3.10 package in bookworm? I was trying to run some experiments in a virtual environment a few days ago, and it turns out that several of the Python packages I needed do not yet run on Python 3.11. I was saved by being able to run in a Python 3.10 venv and download all the required packages from PyPI. If bookworm shipped without python3.10, I would not have been able to do my work. Removing python3.10 from bookworm will seriously affect many of our users in a similar situation to me. Best wishes, Julian P.S. We should also fix #1036268 if we do keep python3.10 in bookworm; I'm happy to do an NMU if needed.
Bug#1030572: ITP: python-countrynames -- Map country names to ISO codes
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Edward Betts X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org, debian-python@lists.debian.org * Package name: python-countrynames Version : 1.14.1 Upstream Author : Friedrich Lindenberg * URL : https://github.com/occrp/countrynames * License : MIT Programming Lang: Python Description : Map country names to ISO codes This library helps with the mapping of country names to their respective two or three letter codes. The idea is to incorporate common names for countries, and even some limited misspellings, as they occur in source data. . There is also support for fuzzy matching, which uses a heuristic based on Levenshtein distance. I plan to maintain this package as part of the Python team.
