Bug#812979: Please add python bindings package

[Emmanuel Bourg]

Le 30/01/2016 19:34, tony mancill a écrit :

> Emmanuel, would you mind terribly if I worked with zigo to extend the
> existing source package to also ship the python bindings?

I don't mind if you implement the changes but I don't think it's a good
idea. antlr3 supports 12 different languages, if we start integrating
Python today this will set a precedent and more languages may be
requested tomorrow. I really don't feel comfortable supporting so many
different languages in the same package. If we do that for antlr4 too
that may restrain us from freely upgrading the Java part in the future
since we don't master all languages and may end up with difficult issues
to solve.

If we were to support another language I think the language specific
packaging team should at least accept to co-maintain the package with us.

Emmanuel Bourg

__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
. 
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Bug#812979: Please add python bindings package

[Thomas Goirand]

On 01/29/2016 08:41 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>> Also, there's no separate tarball for the antlr3 Python package, it's
>> all-in-one.
> 
> Well, couldn't the tarball of the python-antlr3 package simply consist
> in the content of the runtime/Python3 directory? Repacking the tarball
> isn't difficult. That's how the C runtime was packaged I believe
> (libantlr3c).
> 
> Emmanuel Bourg

After some investigation, I can see it wont be easy to detach the Python
module from the rest.

The problem is that the Python bindings require the toplevel tree. See
the code in setup.py:

rootDir = os.path.abspath(
os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), '..', '..'))

then later on the rootDir is used for the jar files.

So, yeah, I could do it, but then it will mean either heavily patching
setup.py, or not run the unit tests. Both options aren't very
satisfying, knowing that it should be very easy to add Python support in
the existing antlr3 package.

I'll try further, and I'll let you know.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
. 
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Bug#812979: Please add python bindings package

[tony mancill]

On 01/30/2016 12:42 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 01/29/2016 08:41 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>>> Also, there's no separate tarball for the antlr3 Python package, it's
>>> all-in-one.
>>
>> Well, couldn't the tarball of the python-antlr3 package simply consist
>> in the content of the runtime/Python3 directory? Repacking the tarball
>> isn't difficult. That's how the C runtime was packaged I believe
>> (libantlr3c).
>>
>> Emmanuel Bourg
> 
> After some investigation, I can see it wont be easy to detach the Python
> module from the rest.
> 
> The problem is that the Python bindings require the toplevel tree. See
> the code in setup.py:
> 
> rootDir = os.path.abspath(
> os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), '..', '..'))
> 
> then later on the rootDir is used for the jar files.
> 
> So, yeah, I could do it, but then it will mean either heavily patching
> setup.py, or not run the unit tests. Both options aren't very
> satisfying, knowing that it should be very easy to add Python support in
> the existing antlr3 package.
> 
> I'll try further, and I'll let you know.

When upstream supports it with an all-in-one source distribution, I feel
that there is sufficient value to building the language bindings from a
single source package to at least give it a try.  If it ends up being
too problematic for Debian or the Java Team specifically, we can always
split the package later.

Emmanuel, would you mind terribly if I worked with zigo to extend the
existing source package to also ship the python bindings?

Cheers,
tony



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
. 
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Bug#812979: Please add python bindings package

[Emmanuel Bourg]

Hi Thomas,

Le 29/01/2016 13:08, Thomas Goirand a écrit :

> The problem doing this, is that if antlr3 evolves and the Python module
> has some kind of adaptation, then we need to release them in sync.

You are right and this has already happened. For example antlr 3.5.2 is
incompatible with antlr 3.2, and we worked around this issue by
introducing an antlr3.2 package.

The good news is that antlr 3.x is not going to evolve anymore, upstream
is now working on antlr 4.x.


> Also, there's no separate tarball for the antlr3 Python package, it's
> all-in-one.

Well, couldn't the tarball of the python-antlr3 package simply consist
in the content of the runtime/Python3 directory? Repacking the tarball
isn't difficult. That's how the C runtime was packaged I believe
(libantlr3c).

Emmanuel Bourg

__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
. 
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Bug#812979: Please add python bindings package

[Thomas Goirand]

On 01/28/2016 06:42 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> I think it would be preferable for every language to package the runtime
> part of antlr separately. This will make the main antlr package easier
> to maintain, and each runtime can be maintained by a language specific
> team mastering the subtleties of its environment.
> 
> This is for the runtime only, the generator part for the other languages
> remains in the main antlr3 package obviously.
> 
> Emmanuel Bourg

Emmanuel,

The problem doing this, is that if antlr3 evolves and the Python module
has some kind of adaptation, then we need to release them in sync. So
its easier to have the antlr3 source package to also support the Python
bindings.

Also, there's no separate tarball for the antlr3 Python package, it's
all-in-one.

Let me know your thoughts. If you still don't change your mind, then
I'll indeed package python-antlr3 separately, even though I don't think
it is the right thing to do.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
. 
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Bug#812979: Please add python bindings package

[Emmanuel Bourg]

Hi Thomas,

I think it would be preferable for every language to package the runtime
part of antlr separately. This will make the main antlr package easier
to maintain, and each runtime can be maintained by a language specific
team mastering the subtleties of its environment.

This is for the runtime only, the generator part for the other languages
remains in the main antlr3 package obviously.

Emmanuel Bourg

__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
. 
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Bug#812979: Please add python bindings package

[Thomas Goirand]

Source: antlr3
Version: 3.5.2-4
Severity: important

Hi,

One of the thing I want to package (namely: github.com/openstack/congress) uses
the Python module for using Antlr3. However, the source package of Antlr3 in
Debian doesn't even contain the folder seen at:
https://github.com/antlr/antlr3/tree/master/runtime/Python

So please package these in Debian as python-antlr3. If you don't know how,
or have no time to do so, could you please at least leave this folder in the
sources package, and then I can provide a patch to add a python package?

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
. 
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.