Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #17150

Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Path	csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.xs3.de!news.samoylyk.net!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.maint.python
Subject	Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Date	Thu, 13 Nov 2025 19:10:01 +0100
Message-ID	<LQJVD-cIsP-23@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<LQJVD-cIsP-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <LP2g2-bxi4-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <LQIdb-cHg4-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <LQIdb-cHg4-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Mailbox-Line	From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Thu Nov 13 18:06:23 2025
Old-Return-Path	<soren@debian.org>
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="nextPart8951994.HvUHHshVSd"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Debian-User	soren
X-Mailing-List	<debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/23353
List-ID	<debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL	<https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive	https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/1918832.334EeT0ntf@soren-desktop
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	100
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Cc	Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org>, Manuel Guerra <ar.manuelguerra@gmail.com>
X-Original-Date	Thu, 13 Nov 2025 11:05:56 -0700
X-Original-Message-ID	<1918832.334EeT0ntf@soren-desktop>
X-Original-References	<E1vHq2d-000qyx-0M@fasolo.debian.org> <d0f61f41-ce9e-4537-ae89-5ccba2034487@gmail.com> <ed4cc729-dd48-4234-a68a-ab2ccef82f52@debian.org>
Xref	csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:17150

Show key headers only | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Thursday, November 13, 2025 9:11:10 AM Mountain Standard Time Matthias 
Klose wrote:
> On 11/9/25 13:37, Gregor Riepl wrote:
> >> There are only a few packages that ship a binary only binary approach
> >> in the Python corner. And if so the ecosystem is more complex. That's
> >> not the case for keepkey.
> > 
> > This seems quite odd to me. If a Python module contains a corresponding
> > application that is frequently used directly, I would expect this to be
> > installed in its own package, named like the application, and not in a
> > pyhon3-modulename package.
> > 
> > If the corresponding module is rarely, if ever used, it's probably
> > better to not produce a python3-modulename package at all, and simply
> > put the module into /usr/share/modulename - this is described in the
> > packaging policy: [1]
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> > [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/
> > #programs-shipping-private-modules
> 
> care to draft something for the Debian policy?
> 
> another reason for splitting even one binary is to have the python3-*
> package M-A: same or M-A: foreign.  This is usually required for
> extension modules very low in the dependency chain.  I didn't check if
> that's the case for this specific package.
> 
> Addressing these issues in the policy also should give ftp-masters some
> guidance.

I can see that being an important concern, and I can see that being a 
persuasive reason to split the packages.

I should note that in the case of python-keepkey, “M-A: same” concerns 
probably don’t apply.  The current keepkeyctl package ships one executable to 
/usr/bin, but it is not a *compiled* executable.  Rather, it is a Python 
script that can be used as a front-end for python3-keepkey.

https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/python-keepkey/-/blob/debian/
master/keepkeyctl?ref_type=heads

The only other file of substance that is shipped in keepkeycli is the man 
page.

Based on the conversation so far, it appears that my understanding was 
incorrect and there is no general objection to shipping files in /usr/bin 
inside of python3-foo packages as long as they do not prevent the package from 
being “M-A: same”.  I will probably wait a few more days to make sure everyone 
who might have an objection has time to comment.  But, if no other concerns 
are raised, then I plan to resubmit the package to NEW with everything 
shipping inside of python3-keepkey.

-- 
Soren Stoutner
soren@debian.org

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-11-09 02:20 +0100
  Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Nicholas D Steeves <sten@debian.org> - 2025-11-09 04:20 +0100
    Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Soren Stoutner <soren@stoutner.com> - 2025-11-09 05:20 +0100
      Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de> - 2025-11-09 07:50 +0100
        Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-11-09 15:40 +0100
        Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2025-11-13 17:20 +0100
          Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-11-13 19:10 +0100
            Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-11-20 23:00 +0100
      Re: python-keepkey_7.2.1+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2025-11-09 13:30 +0100

csiph-web