Hi Barry,
On 06.02.2013 07:07, Barry Warsaw wrote:
Hi Dirk! First, thanks very much for your work on porting empy to Python 3,
and your interest in making this available in Ubuntu.
On Feb 06, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
In the few cases where I've run across such abandonware (e.g. oauth) we've
tried to find suitable replacements that *are* being actively maintained
(e.g. oauthlib).
Well, I would prefer picking a replacement which is actively maintained, too.
But yet I have not a template engine with the flexibility but simplicity of
empy.
May be someone will point me to a project which I have overlooked...
How long ago did you send that email to the authors?
I have sent an email to the author a couple of weeks ago.
But I don't have any hope to receive a response from them.
Have you tried to reach out to any of the folks in the Acknowledgments section
of the home page? (There are no email addresses there, but at least two of
the names look familiar to me.)
If you can point me to their emails I would be happy to try contacting them,
too.
Have you tried to reach out to the Debian maintainer of the package:
% chdist apt-cache sid show python-empy | grep -i maintainer
Maintainer: Ana Beatriz Guerrero Lopez <[email protected]>
Not yet, I will do that right away.
If I receive any feedback I will post that to the list.
Therefore I spent some time making empy work with Python3 (while still
working with Python2). The changes can be found in my GitHub repository
https://github.com/dirk-thomas/empy I am not sure about the common process
for that but it would be great if the maintainer of the Ubuntu package would
consider integrating these.
Since upstream appears abandoned, and the code is LGPL'd, probably the best
long term strategy is to make an official fork and become the new upstream for
the fork. You should probably name the fork something different, but perhaps
evocative of the original, and of course give due credit to the original.
Best if you can give some long-termish commitment to maintaining the upstream
fork, or build a community of folks to help keep it maintained. We don't want
*two* such abandoned packages floating around. ;)
Once you've done that, you should create a new entry in PyPI for your fork, at
which point we could help get the new package into Debian and Ubuntu. Myself,
possibly Ana, and I'm sure lots of others would be willing to help with those
steps.
Honestly I am very likely not able to give a long-termish commitment to
maintain a fork.
I would definitely spend time to support any maintainer to get the patch
upstream and support potential further polishing / fixing.
But before taking maintainer ship of empy I would rather spend even more time on refactoring to use a different solution or integrate empy into one of our custom packages which uses it, because due to
the size of the ROS project I can sadly not afford to additionally maintain package for specific platforms.
Thank you,
Dirk
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
[email protected]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
