Just a quick follow-up I've been meaning to send.
On Jul 02, 2015, at 03:55 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
As part of the 3.5 test rebuild I noticed an incompatibility with
python3-enum, which I reported upstream. The response was: there's actually
no reason to have a Python 3 version of enum in any
On Aug 19, 2015, at 06:41 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
As a Debian developer you are duplicating code, and no, I don't think that
providing this code under a different name is different enough to rectify
distribution of this code in Debian.
In some cases however, the standalone library moves ahead
On 25 August 2015 at 09:57, Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org wrote:
...
By all means, if there isn't any
significant difference between a standalone package and what's available in
the current supported Python 3 version, let's not ship unnecessary binary
packages.
Even at the cost of having to
On Aug 25, 2015, at 10:03 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 25 August 2015 at 09:57, Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org wrote:
...
By all means, if there isn't any
significant difference between a standalone package and what's available in
the current supported Python 3 version, let's not ship
On Aug 25, 2015, at 10:45 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
Lets take Ironic. While it supports Python 2.7+ and 3.4+ it will
depend on 'mock' for unit testing.
That's not unreasonable, and different upstreams will have different policies,
but if it was *my* upstream package, I'd probably do a
On 25 August 2015 at 11:49, Thomas Kluyver tho...@kluyver.me.uk wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015, at 04:30 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
c) write convoluted tricky code to workaround the bugs and differing
behaviour on 3.4 vs 3.5.
I use unittest.mock from Python 3.4 on several packages, and it has not
On Aug 25, 2015, at 11:30 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
Except that that will break: mock in 3.4 vs 3.5 are different.
Then they aren't the same wink. So it sounds like it doesn't make sense to
remove python3-mock from Debian.
Cheers,
-Barry
pgpV2khUPaCtA.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015, at 04:30 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
c) write convoluted tricky code to workaround the bugs and differing
behaviour on 3.4 vs 3.5.
I use unittest.mock from Python 3.4 on several packages, and it has not
required convoluted code. I would be very surprised if that code breaks
On 25 August 2015 at 10:37, Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org wrote:
On Aug 25, 2015, at 10:03 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 25 August 2015 at 09:57, Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org wrote:
...
By all means, if there isn't any
significant difference between a standalone package and what's available
On 07/09/2015 12:25 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 3 July 2015 at 08:29, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com wrote:
I think dropping these duplicates is the only thing that makes sense. For
reference, I dropped python3-ipaddr once python3.2 was gone (because 3.3 has
ipaddress, which does the
On Jul 09, 2015, at 10:25 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
I don't have a view on other packages.
As it turns out, enum34 is actually renaming its public package name so it
won't conflict with the stdlib name. I may end up keeping the python3 variant
after all.
Cheers,
-Barry
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On Jul 9, 2015 5:25 AM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 3 July 2015 at 08:29, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com wrote:
I think dropping these duplicates is the only thing that makes sense.
For
reference, I dropped python3-ipaddr once python3.2 was gone (because
3.3 has
On 3 July 2015 at 08:29, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com wrote:
I think dropping these duplicates is the only thing that makes sense. For
reference, I dropped python3-ipaddr once python3.2 was gone (because 3.3 has
ipaddress, which does the same thing).
Where its a dupe sure.
unittest2,
On July 9, 2015 7:39:15 AM EDT, Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 9, 2015 5:25 AM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
wrote:
On 3 July 2015 at 08:29, Scott Kitterman deb...@kitterman.com
wrote:
I think dropping these duplicates is the only thing that makes
sense.
On July 2, 2015 3:55:30 PM EDT, Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org wrote:
As part of the 3.5 test rebuild I noticed an incompatibility with
python3-enum, which I reported upstream. The response was: there's
actually
no reason to have a Python 3 version of enum in any version = Python
3.4.
Since
So I'd argue that ‘python3-mock’ and the like do have a place in Debian:
they make it easier to follow the recommended strategy of having a code
base run unchanged on Python2 and Python 3.
As it turns out, it looks like upstream enum34 is going to rename the import
to 'enum34' so it won't
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org writes:
[…] there's actually no reason to have a Python 3 version of enum in
any version = Python 3.4. […]
Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com writes:
Probably a silly question,
On 3 July 2015 at 11:44, Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org writes:
[…] there's actually no reason to have a Python 3 version of enum in
any version = Python 3.4. […]
Ian
On 3 July 2015 at 09:53, Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org wrote:
As part of the 3.5 test rebuild I noticed an incompatibility with
python3-enum, which I reported upstream. The response was: there's actually
no reason
Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org writes:
[…] there's actually no reason to have a Python 3 version of enum in
any version = Python 3.4. […]
Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com writes:
Probably a silly question, but are other libraries like unittest2 also
being packaged for python3? Another
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 3 July 2015 at 11:44, Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au
wrote:
Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org writes:
[…] there's actually no
On 3 July 2015 at 11:40, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org writes:
[…] there's actually no reason to have a Python 3 version of enum in
any version = Python 3.4. […]
Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com writes:
Probably a silly question, but are
On 3 July 2015 at 15:05, Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 3 July 2015 at 11:44, Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au
As part of the 3.5 test rebuild I noticed an incompatibility with
python3-enum, which I reported upstream. The response was: there's actually
no reason to have a Python 3 version of enum in any version = Python 3.4.
Since that's all we have now, maybe it makes more sense to just remove the
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@debian.org wrote:
As part of the 3.5 test rebuild I noticed an incompatibility with
python3-enum, which I reported upstream. The response was: there's actually
no reason to have a Python 3 version of enum in any version = Python 3.4.
Since
25 matches
Mail list logo
