Re: Amend Debian Python Proposal to Include More Python Metadata?

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > Currently --record includes the .pyc files which is both unneeded and bad. > Before this gets added either in setuptools or by us, this needed to be fixed. Why is this bad? Isn't the point that the record file

Re: Amend Debian Python Proposal to Include More Python Metadata?

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > For Debian it's bad because we don't ship the .pyc files in the package they > are managed locally by the installed python system. They are also unnecessary > because setuptools/pip/python is smart enough to relate

Re: Test suite in github but missing from pypi tarballs

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:48 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > In the long history of both Python and its packaging this is > absolutely true (all you need is an archive and a setup.py) but > Python's packaging has evolved and improved for its users through > setuptools, pip,

Re: Test suite in github but missing from pypi tarballs

On Apr 21, 2016 13:16, "Jeremy Stanley" wrote: > Agreed, as long as "closely" is interpreted in ways consistent with, > say, tarballs for C-based projects. Consider `setup.py sdist` > similar to `make dist` where the dist target of some projects may > still run additional

Re: Packaging multiple python modules in one Debian package

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Alexander Gerasiov wrote: > Every plugin is just a small parser class which is called from > ofxstatement, parses input file and pass data back to main app. These > plugins are developed independently by various people who publish them > in