Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Soren Stoutner Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2025 15:40:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Sun Nov 9 14:37:35 2025 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-114.51 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, USER_IN_DKIM_WELCOMELIST=-0.01, USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Organization: Debian Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAFVBMVEWIg4F7bGiws7ReTkyy kYoXFRrd6/4yMA0PAAACaklEQVQ4y22TwXabMBBFJaPuNZGSNZZp1uhM6BpkJeu4VFk3bsL/f0Lf CHC6qHyOgbl68zTDoIwaVfh3tUopTUGpbFToDiFnY9IY2oMAZYMiS4R9SfbSXepSS5EcFAa/muIU aRj8mkoUqrEraFzhYegBmqig0LyCIyM8DAwPlpBqmJVYaD2UeWZ3abVjsqKIojg+hY4omsyIcNSi qIBM6jJWOveS6kvBeVvHJ+VYzJUW88RmA12UiBx3HEcUMRuzIZI6tBQovTrPclNB3AuUXoXvs0XY C3B2baJpW4Dn2ZpVMInCirkxoyhM1qpK5nFrO65QvCrCqql2DyPgvm94iMQz5/PmISuEotxQGMD5 M5G1N9CjXJ5HQH96BZG2xx6AzejYZccxT4Re3Zr4bPKkCcGcz5Or3dVEABkAUY/znnVcQVVkrXVU vomoEJFe7x4nQuaZmZELL6qnXZGIB5YV/Q2IogtSmyNybEcBX2+QCLOAQYm+gmoORUrYzV7dc6R2 T1WPm45oVEQqsjtoIovHyTmcyxMhVVxTqapomZyLlAmTKC9AmjgamXXGZo+epNrXO3wGGiPRHbKL FnMy2RRgRb1gzFXXGjhICp8wqaTtdtyQH6nWTfkatJvJJoUCbOjSC7wR9/naEVognxrOFdLh7Ugx QpA/0QT4pRV0+u2dqsXD5y9EBDjVAJS3ZZLxmZblgmsU8x7mBeCKg48Py7WU2IiH1epbEbC8K9Ms y0cpcySVUcdQVrBY+rEsv+XpYgFKXT8B3v2yATxv8fKK2EfC358tsIMLYqfD401xA0j1EY4P/wWf IbhlOWyBv4OQsywBM8MAAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2276916.YMSFD0UMVP"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Debian-User: soren X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23335 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/2279854.1VRYn11xgE@soren-desktop Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 155 Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: Manuel Guerra , Bastian Blank X-Original-Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2025 07:37:05 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: <2279854.1VRYn11xgE@soren-desktop> X-Original-References: <7656f4eb-4dd5-4bdb-9bda-a2a055fedf3c@t-online.de> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:17134 --nextPart2276916.YMSFD0UMVP Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; protected-headers="v1" From: Soren Stoutner To: debian-python@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2025 07:37:05 -0700 Message-ID: <2279854.1VRYn11xgE@soren-desktop> Organization: Debian In-Reply-To: <7656f4eb-4dd5-4bdb-9bda-a2a055fedf3c@t-online.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 On Saturday, November 8, 2025 11:33:21=E2=80=AFPM Mountain Standard Time Ca= rsten=20 Schoenert wrote: > [Removed some unneeded participants] >=20 > Am 09.11.25 um 05:49 schrieb Soren Stoutner: > > I apologize if I did not make it clear from the original email. > > They do not, in fact, depend on each other. >=20 > Difficult to "proof" as there is no pointing to any packaging source. Here is the package source: https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/python-keepkey On Sunday, November 9, 2025 5:07:30=E2=80=AFAM Mountain Standard Time Basti= an Blank=20 wrote: > On Sat, Nov 08, 2025 at 08:49:48PM -0700, Soren Stoutner wrote: > > I apologize if I did not make it clear from the original email. They do > > not, in fact, depend on each other. Rather, there is a pure Python mod= ule > > that can be used by other programs (in fact, the purpose in packaging i= t=20 is > > for Electrum to use the Python module) and an optional executable=20 installed > > in /usr/bin. The Python module does not depend on the executable utili= ty, > > but the executable utility does depend on the Python module (a one-way > > dependency, not a two-way dependency on each other). > They do: > | Package: keepkeyctl > | Source: python-keepkey > | Depends: python3:any, python3-keepkey (=3D 7.2.1+dfsg-1) *One* of the packages depends on the other. Perhaps we are misunderstandin= g=20 each other, but that is different than *both* packages depending on each=20 other. https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/python-keepkey/-/blob/debian/ master/debian/control?ref_type=3Dheads On Saturday, November 8, 2025 8:18:23=E2=80=AFPM Mountain Standard Time Nic= holas D=20 Steeves wrote: > Ftpmasters' decision today doesn't mean that at some point in the future > the package shouldn't be split. If a future version of the lib no > longer depends on the app and is useful as a general system lib, then > that is when you add the second package and send it through the NEW > queue for reevaluation. Why is that unacceptable? What you describe in the above paragraph is already the case. The library= =20 does not depend on the CLI utility and it is useful as a general system=20 library. Indeed, it is posted on PyPI.org (although the latest version has= n=E2=80=99t=20 been posted there for some reason). https://pypi.org/project/keepkey/ On Sunday, November 9, 2025 5:37:18=E2=80=AFAM Mountain Standard Time Grego= r Riepl=20 wrote: > In fact, I can't find any guidance on combined Python module+application > packages (except for the mentioned case of private modules) in the Debian > Python Policy. If there is any, I'd be very interested as well. Indeed. When I originally went to answer Bastian=E2=80=99s question, I loo= ked in the=20 Debian Python Policy for something I could quote explaining this situation.= I=20 was a little surprised not to find it explicitly described, as this has bee= n=20 the standard practice for Python packages since I have been packaging for=20 Debian. Part of the reason why I included the Python team in this discussi= on=20 is to understand if I have been misinformed about the Python packaging=20 expectations. If so, there are a lot of our team maintained packages that= =20 need to be updated. When the package was initially rejected, the stated reason was because both= of=20 the binary package depended on each other. If that had been the case, I wo= uld=20 have agreed. But, as demonstrated in the link above, they do not both depe= nd=20 on each other. When I responded explaining that they did not both depend on each other, an= d=20 that for Python libraries, it is customary for the library to be in one=20 package and any executable utilities in a separate package, the response wa= s=20 that they should still be merged into one binary package because they were= =20 small, with a link to the FAQ talking about how small packages should not b= e=20 split off from each other. >Please read our FAQ, it is listed under "Package split". >https://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html I wholeheartedly agree with that principle in general. These are small=20 packages, and, in this case, there is only a single executable being instal= led=20 into /usr/bin. However, my previous understanding was that the very differ= ent=20 nature of the two binary packages (one being a system library, the other be= ing=20 an executable utility) was sufficient reason for them to be separate. =2D-=20 Soren Stoutner soren@debian.org --nextPart2276916.YMSFD0UMVP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEJKVN2yNUZnlcqOI+wufLJ66wtgMFAmkQpxEACgkQwufLJ66w tgP3CQ/+NQ56NwHcccamNp6DKyMLPEgpTs2R9mEMxOacz87FplblJIyo22A/udgA ojAWN48ENl5Lw1WO3E1468RkU3d7Fx/AbK7TpxN0mzOwWSRhmEBNT4bRQt6hku8Z FcCzeS9vjsIzXfk1CZCAWEgbyz3zB3RbCta0Cjdj2t+Yte8h4gqitah9pllAudqr br8oT7I/5yvbEwkdo9JbJg8Vmb8Y/IYL1y0r3CoUs3wRhaLUtWHwZY51lM1FAJgZ 7RwUm7j70i4Y3PfCp4EinkEQo2+jTjLbiudKlZ9Z0daUcOeDIuXpJbOLiVgU8wYv VZAjT6pjpbbrbCIVbcjzacGQNL/0MF1/5yJhEUS3kFTnYMhgGQeCYIjA3iXmzC0+ KVlHr2iFkxSSyykh/8EK4h6oLbxZ1dVvfRokLUpVl596TwjCMGUgztR+BhbL3Rdy ghxDLdi7sUYGF8oKNXz2LDcNJG2q2kB1YCh8AOc53FGhaYEF6h0wn1ZfWAc0BAA5 iLCRfiD+D7Jiggn5+v39LegU2f3OTC60HDxiPsb1/aGUgmLwnwk0GiJyBB4hasP/ zWzer6FzK+wnOuQ2IxCIey8pW/BX+UgtBozfwk1ntO2ty/I7cHYQSgb/xxGmP9tw 3tAZU8kZyUR4CtInlT5rTCGNVB3UgJ71wmtEGc7QuFUkTTM/eF8= =JbHs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2276916.YMSFD0UMVP--