Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: "Donald Stufft" Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: python devs complaining about debian packaging Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 01:30:01 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: "Stefano Rivera" , "" X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Sun May 26 23:23:29 2024 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FOURLA=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: NOT_IN_SBL_XBL_SPAMHAUS=-1.5 CL_IP_EQ_HELO_IP=-2 (check from: .stufft. - helo: .mail-oi1-x229.google. - helo-domain: .google.) FROM/MX_MATCHES_HELO(DOMAIN)=-2; rate: -5.5 X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVZJzw2g5w7eoG/iPi7H4kXFV7eBK0lX8HPczBcAsWnocAFvF14GgeSeTQ8TYd77hE+5qeba84AL51bV/C6KG9R4zG9St7Ogz7X5AtJ+ow= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YztuvqCUEWfc4QpvUTu+eQcTWuM9h6AV6b19af3yHa3qvJob5q8 nK4DE8YSW/43q6XwC9crlDXWE29AcYOtJLPrGWkz0eKS95y0UXlAkYSbTxDAUAORs096kmSLZxJ 5BWE= X-Google-SMTP-Source: AGHT+IEaIirae1PwQs/TnEMcAJ/PImjN65KMpAUEmIOWoOrzHOPAAXUFmZxryszZ7cUHICkRUxnLtw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:23d4:b0:3c8:63ca:8e7e with SMTP id 5614622812f47-3d1a548342bmr10573653b6e.1.1716765785826; Sun, 26 May 2024 16:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_41908206.186329293650" MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mailbird/3.0.13.0 X-Mailbird-ID: Mailbird-49833c7e-fe6a-4af4-89c7-4b962879bffd@stufft.io X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/21904 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/Mailbird-49833c7e-fe6a-4af4-89c7-4b962879bffd@stufft.io Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 155 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 19:23:03 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-References: <2901031.mvXUDI8C0e@galatea> <20240526133904.mx4loikydakvqaym@satie.tumbleweed.org.za> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:15874 ------=_NextPart_41908206.186329293650 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I happen to be subscribed here, so figured I'd comment :) FWIW I think the way the discussions are going... really in both locations.= . is needlessly taking shots at each other. I've commented on discuss.python.org, but figured I'd repeat myself here. I think the way these discussions devolve into each "side" taking shots at = each other and arguing over nonsense that doesn't matter does everyone a di= sservice.=C2=A0 The facts of the matter, as far as I can tell: - Distributors ship Python and a number of people find great value in that = and it works great or at least fine for them. - A number of users have needs or wants that are not well served by the Pyt= hon that distributors ship, for one reason or another. People in either of those groups sniping at each other for wanting the "wro= ng" things is completely unproductive.=C2=A0 It's probably "fine" if Python.org wants to ship a linux binary, I suspect = it'll have very little impact on distributors of Python (and might even mak= e things better-- since some of the problems flow from an impedance mismatc= h, and it provides a different escape hatch to point people towards if the = distro Python doesn't suit their needs). On 5/26/2024 9:39:25 AM, Stefano Rivera wrote: Hi Ian (2024.05.26_01:33:09_+0000) > I am puzzled about some of the responses there, how can anyone expect to > randomly update packages on the system using pip and not have it go wrong > on any distribution? This is why things like pipenv exist. People don't understand that stuff until they dig to the details. And even then, sometimes they forget and/or assume we have the resources to massively revamp our stack. There are long-standing grievances here (see tiran's gist for example). I have very little experience with Fedora/RH, but from their grumbling, I assume they solve some problems for developers that we don't: 1. It appears that multiple versions of cPython are trivially available. Each version has its own site-packages. 2. Their python packaging is more developer-centric than user-centric. More modules included in the install. We're pretty constrained on 1 by the debian security team policy. But maybe there is discussion room there for non-supported Pythons? We have taken steps to improve 2 by adding the python3-full package. I could see a long term strategy for having a system-python package that provides a python3 binary used by Debian packages that need Python. And a separate python package for developers that installs all the bells and whistles immediately. Achieving this would require reorganizing the way we package almost all Python, and I don't think we have the interest and resources to do that. If pyenv was packaged in Debian (ITP #978149) it would probably be great for new Python developers on Debian. Not sure what other small tactical steps we could take? > > Perhaps someone else wants to comment on that conversation Replied. I've engaged with these guys on this stuff before. Let's see where it goes... Stefano -- Stefano Rivera http://tumbleweed.org.za/ +1 415 683 3272 [163d8144-a584-4d1d-9d71-f86da864fde2] ------=_NextPart_41908206.186329293650 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=0A = =0A =0A = =0A = =0A =0A = I happen to be subscribed here, so figured I'd comment :)
FWIW I think the way the discussions are going... really in bo= th locations.. is needlessly taking shots at each other.

I've commented on discuss.python.org, but figured I'd repeat myself = here.

I think the way these discussions devolve in= to each "side" taking shots at each other and arguing over nonsense that do= esn't matter does everyone a disservice. 

The= facts of the matter, as far as I can tell:

- Dist= ributors ship Python and a number of people find great value in that and it= works great or at least fine for them.
- A number of users have = needs or wants that are not well served by the Python that distributors shi= p, for one reason or another.

People in either of = those groups sniping at each other for wanting the "wrong" things is comple= tely unproductive. 

It's probably "fine" if P= ython.org wants to ship a linux binary, I suspect it'll have very little im= pact on distributors of Python (and might even make things better-- since s= ome of the problems flow from an impedance mismatch, and it provides a diff= erent escape hatch to point people towards if the distro Python doesn't sui= t their needs).

=0A =

On 5/26/2024 = 9:39:25 AM, Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> wrote:

Hi Ian (2024.05.26_01:33:09_+00= 00)=0A
> I am puzzled about some of the responses there, how can anyo= ne expect to=0A
> randomly update packages on the system using pip an= d not have it go wrong=0A
> on any distribution? This is why things l= ike pipenv exist.=0A
=0A
People don't understand that stuff until the= y dig to the details. And=0A
even then, sometimes they forget and/or ass= ume we have the resources to=0A
massively revamp our stack.=0A
=0AThere are long-standing grievances here (see tiran's gist for example).=0A=
I have very little experience with Fedora/RH, but from their grumbling,= =0A
I assume they solve some problems for developers that we don't:=0A=0A
1. It appears that multiple versions of cPython are trivially avai= lable.=0A
Each version has its own site-packages.=0A
2. Their pyth= on packaging is more developer-centric than user-centric.=0A
More mod= ules included in the install.=0A
=0A
We're pretty constrained on 1 by= the debian security team policy. But=0A
maybe there is discussion room = there for non-supported Pythons?=0A
=0A
We have taken steps to improv= e 2 by adding the python3-full package.=0A
=0A
I could see a long ter= m strategy for having a system-python package that=0A
provides a python3= binary used by Debian packages that need Python. And=0A
a separate pyth= on package for developers that installs all the bells and=0A
whistles im= mediately.=0A
=0A
Achieving this would require reorganizing the way w= e package almost all=0A
Python, and I don't think we have the interest a= nd resources to do that.=0A
=0A
If pyenv was packaged in Debian (ITP = #978149) it would probably be great=0A
for new Python developers on Debi= an.=0A
=0A
Not sure what other small tactical steps we could take?=0A=
=0A
> > Perhaps someone else wants to comment on that conversa= tion=0A
=0A
Replied. I've engaged with these guys on this stuff befor= e. Let's see=0A
where it goes...=0A
=0A
Stefano=0A
=0A
-- = =0A
Stefano Rivera=0A
http://tumbleweed.org.za/=0A
+1 415 683 = 3272=0A
=0A
3D"163d8144-a584-4d1d-9d71-f86da864fd= ------=_NextPart_41908206.186329293650--