Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On 5/18/20 11:24 AM, jojo wrote: > One private question: What do you use? I remember that back then when I > found out that Debian stable is pretty oldish I was always using > testing. My teamleader recently told me that he's actually using > unstable these days and prefers it over testing. I think if one wants > halfway modern software there is only two options: Use Ubuntu(ish) or > use Debian unstable? Right? I use Debian Stable, and whenever I need something new (which is very rare), then I do my own backports. > Thanks so much for all this hints My pleasure. > One question: Often I > read the workflow is to first create a source package and then the > binary package from it. Is that true for python tools as well? Yes. > I mean > there is no "source/binary" in this sense. There is. I am not sure I understand... > And this does not seem to be > a source package but a regular package I would install as user using > apt: https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/applications/rename-flac.git This git is using pristine-tar, just like everything else within the Python team. The debian/master branch contains the upstream sources plus the Debian folder. This really is a source package repository. > I guess I knew the answer already ;-) IMHO it's a shame that Discogs is > not responsive at all to pull-requests in the last ~1-2 years, I would > rather prefer if I package the official discogs_client (really > maintained by discogs.com themselves) but to complete my task, I will > just package my fork because it just works and has two features that I > just require. Best is if you can package upstream code, and add your specific patches in debian/patches, so that they are well identified. > Anyway, tell me what you think: First package my fork to get things > done, then ask discogs.com if they want to be in debian and I would do > it if they would finally work on some of the pulls that are open for > almost "years" already. Hopefully that works. I can't tell though, you'll see! >> You're talking about joining the list. But what about the Python APP >> team? Do you intend to join it? > > I think I still don't understand the difference between "being on the > debian-python list" and joining the "python app packagning team". Please > elaborate again! Most of all: What exactly would it mean if I "join the > team". Joining the list only means your receive messages from it. Joining the team means you become a member of the Salsa Python APP group. We ask people to first read our policy about it, and agree with it. Then you can ask to join. If you're accepted, then you get write access to the Git directly (and you can create new projects too). Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:24:23AM +0200, jojo wrote: > One question: Often I read the workflow is to first create a source > package and then the binary package from it. Is that true for python > tools as well? Yes. > I mean there is no "source/binary" in this sense. It doesn't matter whether there are sources and binaries. There is still a source package and a binary package created from it. > And this does not seem to be a source package but a regular > package I would install as user using apt: > https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/applications/rename-flac.git No, you cannot install a git repo with apt. Binary packages are .deb files. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
Hi Thomas,
On 15.05.20 18:55, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 5/15/20 5:43 PM, jojo wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable
addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it
into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related.
I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of
Ubuntu... :(
Feels like we have room for a little smalltalk here :-) I wouldn't put
it this way but rather mention how unbelievable it is that Debian is the
basis for so many other distributions! Back in 98 when I first started
with Linux Debian was my first love (codename Potato LOL). Only Distro
that was seemed "logic" and easy customizable IMHO. And I still dig
Debian based over others but have to admit that I only used Linux at
work, the past 15 years and only nowish coming back to feeling the need
of having a Linux box at home. I have been using a Macbook the last
years - best of both worlds: nice gui and music tools (I use Ableton
Live mostly) and also via homebrew can use UNIX tools and great Open
Source tools (Blender, Inkscape, Gimp, Audacity rules!!!). At work we
have a mixture of RHEL and Ubuntu and for Hardware often there is no
discussion wether to use something else than RedHat because of support
and blabla. All have there advantages but Debian will ever stay in my
heart as the one and only that got me hooked! And most importantly: It
will be like a dream coming true, when my tool really makes its way into
DEBIAN! OH YEAH!
One private question: What do you use? I remember that back then when I
found out that Debian stable is pretty oldish I was always using
testing. My teamleader recently told me that he's actually using
unstable these days and prefers it over testing. I think if one wants
halfway modern software there is only two options: Use Ubuntu(ish) or
use Debian unstable? Right?
I already filed a bug report against the wnpp pseudo package but I am
not quite sure what would be the next step and which packaging guides it
is best to follow to get started with packaging and finally uploading
it.
IMO, the best thing to start with is the packaging tutorial:
apt-get install packaging-tutorial
It's nicely written. Then you should read the Debian Policy Manual.
Finally, search and read the python policy (in the wiki?) if your app is
Python based.
Should my next step be following this tutorial on packaging?
https://packaging.ubuntu.com/html/packaging-new-software.html
This guide talks about bzr. It's not in use anywhere these days, even
Ubuntu people don't use it anymore. It's also Python 2 only, and
therefore, we removed it from Debian.
IMO, you should install sbuild to start with:
https://wiki.debian.org/sbuild
and then go from the above. Note that I don't think using dh_make is a
good idea. It's IMO nicer to just take another Python app as example.
Look at the team's Git for that.
Thanks so much for all this hints, I would have given up if I were alone
here. It really is a jungle of documentation and you never know if it's
the rigth one, if it's outdate or whatevernot easy I have just
set up sbuild and it seems to run. I think I packaged hello successfully
haha ;-)
Following your hint and am now cloning a simple python tool
('rename-flac' seems appropriate for learning). One question: Often I
read the workflow is to first create a source package and then the
binary package from it. Is that true for python tools as well? I mean
there is no "source/binary" in this sense. And this does not seem to be
a source package but a regular package I would install as user using
apt: https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/applications/rename-flac.git
Also some other questions arise as my tool has a dependency that I am
pretty sure is not in debian already. the official discogs_client - a
python sdk to access discogs.com rest api, and actually I forked and
extended it. pull-request to official repo is pending:
https://github.com/JOJ0/discogs_client
Well, if you need it for your app, then it must be packaged in Debian as
well if you intend to depend on it.
I guess I knew the answer already ;-) IMHO it's a shame that Discogs is
not responsive at all to pull-requests in the last ~1-2 years, I would
rather prefer if I package the official discogs_client (really
maintained by discogs.com themselves) but to complete my task, I will
just package my fork because it just works and has two features that I
just require.
I suppose they will stay unresponsive even if I ask them that I would
like to package them for Debian. I don't know what there problem is,
either they are not really interested in a feature-complete python sdk
or they just don't have enough time/manpower for it. Recently it seems
they focus on their mobile app a lot (needed work, that buggy piece
o.. ;-)))
Anyway, tell me what you think: First package my fork to get things
done, then ask discogs.com if they want to be in
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
Hi List, On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 05:32:30PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > We still have some things better than Ubuntu: > - not converting everything to Snaps Could the fact that Ubuntu is "converting everything to Snaps" impact the current policy that "If someone tries to upload a NEW package, they're always told to go to Debian." ? In other words, could the contribution from Ubuntu to Debian diminishes because more effort is put on Snaps and less effort on improving upstream Debian packages ? [I hope this is not too off-topic for debian-python, feel free to point me to an archived thread somewhere else if you know one]. -- Nicolas Chauvat logilab.fr - services en informatique scientifique et gestion de connaissances
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 11:09:33AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 19:56 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > FTR, UbuntuStudio is an official Ubuntu flavor, not a derivative ;) > Woops. Did that change at some point or did I mix them up with another > distro or just make a stupid mistake? Couldn't say, sorry. It's certainly been that way for several years already. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
❦ 16 mai 2020 08:09 -04, Paul Tagliamonte: >> > Would it be fair to say that your main objection is that Ubuntu has >> > much higher popularity than Debian >> >> This is what I regret, indeed. It's been like that for many years, and >> the trend isn't reversing. We should ask ourselves why. From my point of >> view, I see it as a problem of marketing more than OS content or >> technical excellence. > > No, I think they do things better. Their installer is much better, and it's > a *lot* easier to switch. They had signed UEFI images before us, > and they enable things like firmware for wifi cards. This allows > Ubuntu to be easier for non-technical users to install computers > without understanding main vs contrib vs nonfree, how to disable > SecureBoot or what a firmware package is. We have lessons > to learn about usability and we've not learned them, and remained > stubborn about it. Also for servers: - official cloud images far before us (kudos to Zigo for bootstrapping the effort on our side) - PPA - HWE kernels We still have some things better than Ubuntu: - backports - security support - not converting everything to Snaps -- There is a great discovery still to be made in Literature: that of paying literary men by the quantity they do NOT write. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On 5/16/20 3:36 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > Would it be fair to say that your main objection is that Ubuntu has > much higher popularity than Debian This is what I regret, indeed. It's been like that for many years, and the trend isn't reversing. We should ask ourselves why. From my point of view, I see it as a problem of marketing more than OS content or technical excellence. > and so the Ubuntu policy to work > upstream where possible leads people to come to Debian without > necessarily caring about the Debian community or users but more about > Ubuntu users? We are lucky this happens. > Personally, I think over the years Ubuntu's Debian involvement has > been a net positive for Debian Indeed. > both in terms of packaging and other > technical changes and in terms of attracting new contributors, often > Ubuntu migrants end up contributing to Debian more than Ubuntu. I > think the same goes for derivatives in general. That's truth. I am very thankful for Canonical to contribute things like Grub, Python, MySQL and many other things directly in Debian. It's very nice that some full time employees can take care of stuff like that. It's also nice that some components are explicitly worked on to be the same in both distros. I also like the fact that they push contributors to work on upstream Debian. Never the less, I've seen multiple occurrences where some people vaguely knew what Ubuntu was, but never heard of Debian. Saw others saying wrong things, like Ubuntu was updating faster (which is wrong, as packages are updated in Sid first). And many other things of that type. Isn't it legitimate that I'm asking myself why? Shouldn't the Debian project try to question its image? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Re: Disparaging people's motivation to contribute to Debian was: Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On 5/15/20 10:42 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Friday, May 15, 2020 4:36:52 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: >> On 5/15/20 7:09 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: >>> On Friday, May 15, 2020 12:55:48 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: On 5/15/20 5:43 PM, jojo wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable > addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it > into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related. I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of Ubuntu... :( >>> >>> Thomas, >>> >>> Ask yourself if you are modelling being a member of a welcoming community >>> here? >>> >>> There are lots of examples of people who initially became interested in >>> Debian via Ubuntu and are good Debian contributors and project members. >>> >>> You are free to think whatever you want, but I don't think this kind of >>> sentiment has any place on Debian lists. >>> >>> Scott K >> >> This was kind of rhetorical, and it is my believe that if it is the way >> it is, *we* are at fault, globally in Debian. I'm just not sure how to >> fix that. I BTW don't agree with you, and IMO, this has some place on >> the Debian lists. Having Debian (directly) appealing to everyone is very >> important topic. >> >> Of course, Jojo is very much welcome, and I'm sorry that you take it >> this way. I've pointed at many docs to help, so I very much believe he >> knows I warmly welcome him. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Thomas Goirand (zigo) > > If you don't actually think it's a shame he wants to participate in Debian, > it > might be better not to say so. I should be more careful with my choice of words. If I'm not mistaking, in English, "it's a shame" can have 2 meanings. One is like "shame on you", which isn't what I meant. The other one is "I regret that", which was what I originally wanted to say. Does it make more sense now? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 19:56 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > FTR, UbuntuStudio is an official Ubuntu flavor, not a derivative ;) Woops. Did that change at some point or did I mix them up with another distro or just make a stupid mistake? -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 01:36:38AM +, Paul Wise wrote: > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 4:56 PM Thomas Goirand wrote: > > I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of > > Ubuntu... :( > FTR, Ubuntu Studio is not Ubuntu, it is an Ubuntu derivative. FTR, UbuntuStudio is an official Ubuntu flavor, not a derivative ;) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 4:56 PM Thomas Goirand wrote: > I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of > Ubuntu... :( FTR, Ubuntu Studio is not Ubuntu, it is an Ubuntu derivative. Would it be fair to say that your main objection is that Ubuntu has much higher popularity than Debian and so the Ubuntu policy to work upstream where possible leads people to come to Debian without necessarily caring about the Debian community or users but more about Ubuntu users? Personally, I think over the years Ubuntu's Debian involvement has been a net positive for Debian, both in terms of packaging and other technical changes and in terms of attracting new contributors, often Ubuntu migrants end up contributing to Debian more than Ubuntu. I think the same goes for derivatives in general. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Disparaging people's motivation to contribute to Debian was: Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On Friday, May 15, 2020 4:36:52 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 5/15/20 7:09 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > On Friday, May 15, 2020 12:55:48 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: > >> On 5/15/20 5:43 PM, jojo wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable > >>> addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it > >>> into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related. > >> > >> I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of > >> Ubuntu... :( > > > > Thomas, > > > > Ask yourself if you are modelling being a member of a welcoming community > > here? > > > > There are lots of examples of people who initially became interested in > > Debian via Ubuntu and are good Debian contributors and project members. > > > > You are free to think whatever you want, but I don't think this kind of > > sentiment has any place on Debian lists. > > > > Scott K > > This was kind of rhetorical, and it is my believe that if it is the way > it is, *we* are at fault, globally in Debian. I'm just not sure how to > fix that. I BTW don't agree with you, and IMO, this has some place on > the Debian lists. Having Debian (directly) appealing to everyone is very > important topic. > > Of course, Jojo is very much welcome, and I'm sorry that you take it > this way. I've pointed at many docs to help, so I very much believe he > knows I warmly welcome him. > > Cheers, > > Thomas Goirand (zigo) If you don't actually think it's a shame he wants to participate in Debian, it might be better not to say so. I think your response it logically disjoint from your original mail, so I don't see any point in further conversation on the matter. Scott K signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On 5/15/20 7:09 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Friday, May 15, 2020 12:55:48 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: >> On 5/15/20 5:43 PM, jojo wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable >>> addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it >>> into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related. >> >> I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of >> Ubuntu... :( > > Thomas, > > Ask yourself if you are modelling being a member of a welcoming community > here? > > There are lots of examples of people who initially became interested in > Debian > via Ubuntu and are good Debian contributors and project members. > > You are free to think whatever you want, but I don't think this kind of > sentiment has any place on Debian lists. > > Scott K This was kind of rhetorical, and it is my believe that if it is the way it is, *we* are at fault, globally in Debian. I'm just not sure how to fix that. I BTW don't agree with you, and IMO, this has some place on the Debian lists. Having Debian (directly) appealing to everyone is very important topic. Of course, Jojo is very much welcome, and I'm sorry that you take it this way. I've pointed at many docs to help, so I very much believe he knows I warmly welcome him. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On 2020-05-15 17:43, jojo wrote: > I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable addition > to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it into Ubuntu > Studio because it is music-related. Cool! Sounds like a very interesting program, indeed!
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On Friday, May 15, 2020 12:55:48 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 5/15/20 5:43 PM, jojo wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable > > addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it > > into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related. > > I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of > Ubuntu... :( Thomas, Ask yourself if you are modelling being a member of a welcoming community here? There are lots of examples of people who initially became interested in Debian via Ubuntu and are good Debian contributors and project members. You are free to think whatever you want, but I don't think this kind of sentiment has any place on Debian lists. Scott K signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs
On 5/15/20 5:43 PM, jojo wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable > addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it > into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related. I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of Ubuntu... :( > I already filed a bug report against the wnpp pseudo package but I am > not quite sure what would be the next step and which packaging guides it > is best to follow to get started with packaging and finally uploading > it. IMO, the best thing to start with is the packaging tutorial: apt-get install packaging-tutorial It's nicely written. Then you should read the Debian Policy Manual. Finally, search and read the python policy (in the wiki?) if your app is Python based. > Should my next step be following this tutorial on packaging? > https://packaging.ubuntu.com/html/packaging-new-software.html This guide talks about bzr. It's not in use anywhere these days, even Ubuntu people don't use it anymore. It's also Python 2 only, and therefore, we removed it from Debian. IMO, you should install sbuild to start with: https://wiki.debian.org/sbuild and then go from the above. Note that I don't think using dh_make is a good idea. It's IMO nicer to just take another Python app as example. Look at the team's Git for that. > Also some other questions arise as my tool has a dependency that I am > pretty sure is not in debian already. the official discogs_client - a > python sdk to access discogs.com rest api, and actually I forked and > extended it. pull-request to official repo is pending: > https://github.com/JOJ0/discogs_client Well, if you need it for your app, then it must be packaged in Debian as well if you intend to depend on it. > Well enough already, let's discuss stuff when I am on the list :-) You're talking about joining the list. But what about the Python APP team? Do you intend to join it? Thanks for your interest in Debian packaging and your intention to package your app, Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
