Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #12585 > unrolled thread

packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs jojo <jojo@peek-a-boo.at> - 2020-05-15 18:10 +0200
    Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2020-05-15 19:20 +0200
      Disparaging people's motivation to contribute to Debian was: Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2020-05-15 22:50 +0200
        Re: Disparaging people's motivation to contribute to Debian Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> - 2020-05-16 11:40 +0200
    Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Martin <debacle@debian.org> - 2020-05-15 20:00 +0200
    Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2020-05-16 03:40 +0200
      Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2020-05-16 05:10 +0200
        Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2020-05-18 01:50 +0200
          Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2020-05-18 02:20 +0200
      Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2020-05-16 05:10 +0200
      Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org> - 2020-05-16 14:30 +0200
        Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> - 2020-05-16 17:50 +0200
          Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Nicolas Chauvat <nicolas.chauvat@logilab.fr> - 2020-05-18 09:20 +0200
            Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2020-05-18 09:30 +0200
    Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs jojo <jojo@peek-a-boo.at> - 2020-05-18 11:50 +0200
      Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2020-05-18 11:50 +0200

#12585 — packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs

Hi,

I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable 
addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it 
into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related.

I already filed a bug report against the wnpp pseudo package but I am 
not quite sure what would be the next step and which packaging guides it 
is best to follow to get started with packaging and finally uploading 
it. On my day-job I am a Linux sysadmin/devops guy so probably should 
manage to follow along any guides. I just want to make sure I follow the 
right ones. I guess this team could tell me instantly where to start :-)

This is the bug about the new package: 
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=960698
Should my next step be following this tutorial on packaging? 
https://packaging.ubuntu.com/html/packaging-new-software.html

Also some other questions arise as my tool has a dependency that I am 
pretty sure is not in debian already. the official discogs_client - a 
python sdk to access discogs.com rest api, and actually I forked and 
extended it. pull-request to official repo is pending: 
https://github.com/JOJ0/discogs_client

Well enough already, let's discuss stuff when I am on the list :-)

thanks in advance,

all the best

Jojo

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#12586

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

On Friday, May 15, 2020 12:55:48 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 5/15/20 5:43 PM, jojo wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable
> > addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it
> > into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related.
> 
> I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of
> Ubuntu... :(

Thomas,

Ask yourself if you are modelling being a member of a welcoming community 
here?

There are lots of examples of people who initially became interested in Debian 
via Ubuntu and are good Debian contributors and project members.

You are free to think whatever you want, but I don't think this kind of 
sentiment has any place on Debian lists.

Scott K

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12589 — Disparaging people's motivation to contribute to Debian was: Re: packaging DiscoDOS - a cli tool for vinyl DJs

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

On Friday, May 15, 2020 4:36:52 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 5/15/20 7:09 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Friday, May 15, 2020 12:55:48 PM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >> On 5/15/20 5:43 PM, jojo wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> 
> >>> I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable
> >>> addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it
> >>> into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related.
> >> 
> >> I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of
> >> Ubuntu... :(
> > 
> > Thomas,
> > 
> > Ask yourself if you are modelling being a member of a welcoming community
> > here?
> > 
> > There are lots of examples of people who initially became interested in
> > Debian via Ubuntu and are good Debian contributors and project members.
> > 
> > You are free to think whatever you want, but I don't think this kind of
> > sentiment has any place on Debian lists.
> > 
> > Scott K
> 
> This was kind of rhetorical, and it is my believe that if it is the way
> it is, *we* are at fault, globally in Debian. I'm just not sure how to
> fix that. I BTW don't agree with you, and IMO, this has some place on
> the Debian lists. Having Debian (directly) appealing to everyone is very
> important topic.
> 
> Of course, Jojo is very much welcome, and I'm sorry that you take it
> this way. I've pointed at many docs to help, so I very much believe he
> knows I warmly welcome him.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)

If you don't actually think it's a shame he wants to participate in Debian, it 
might be better not to say so.  I think your response it logically disjoint 
from your original mail, so I don't see any point in further conversation on 
the matter.

Scott K

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12595 — Re: Disparaging people's motivation to contribute to Debian

> as what I originally wanted to say.
> 
> Does it make more sense now?

Yes.  All fine now.   And not fine.  It will never be "all fine"


My point:  Let go, let go

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12587

On 2020-05-15 17:43, jojo wrote:
> I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable addition
> to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it into Ubuntu
> Studio because it is music-related.

Cool! Sounds like a very interesting program, indeed!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12590

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 4:56 PM Thomas Goirand wrote:

> I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of
> Ubuntu... :(

FTR, Ubuntu Studio is not Ubuntu, it is an Ubuntu derivative.

Would it be fair to say that your main objection is that Ubuntu has
much higher popularity than Debian and so the Ubuntu policy to work
upstream where possible leads people to come to Debian without
necessarily caring about the Debian community or users but more about
Ubuntu users?

Personally, I think over the years Ubuntu's Debian involvement has
been a net positive for Debian, both in terms of packaging and other
technical changes and in terms of attracting new contributors, often
Ubuntu migrants end up contributing to Debian more than Ubuntu. I
think the same goes for derivatives in general.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12591

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

On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 19:56 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:

> FTR, UbuntuStudio is an official Ubuntu flavor, not a derivative ;)

Woops. Did that change at some point or did I mix them up with another
distro or just make a stupid mistake?

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12602

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

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 11:09:33AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 19:56 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:

> > FTR, UbuntuStudio is an official Ubuntu flavor, not a derivative ;)

> Woops. Did that change at some point or did I mix them up with another
> distro or just make a stupid mistake?

Couldn't say, sorry.  It's certainly been that way for several years
already.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                   https://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12603

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

On Sunday, May 17, 2020 7:44:38 PM EDT Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 11:09:33AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 19:56 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > FTR, UbuntuStudio is an official Ubuntu flavor, not a derivative ;)
> > 
> > Woops. Did that change at some point or did I mix them up with another
> > distro or just make a stupid mistake?
> 
> Couldn't say, sorry.  It's certainly been that way for several years
> already.

Although it predates the terminology "official flavor" by some years, it's 
effectively been one since it was first released with 7.04 (Feisty Fawn, IIRC).

Scott K

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12592

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

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 01:36:38AM +0000, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 4:56 PM Thomas Goirand wrote:

> > I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of
> > Ubuntu... :(

> FTR, Ubuntu Studio is not Ubuntu, it is an Ubuntu derivative.

FTR, UbuntuStudio is an official Ubuntu flavor, not a derivative ;)

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                   https://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12598

This is very frustrating to read.

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 6:04 AM Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote:
>
> On 5/16/20 3:36 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> > Would it be fair to say that your main objection is that Ubuntu has
> > much higher popularity than Debian
>
> This is what I regret, indeed. It's been like that for many years, and
> the trend isn't reversing. We should ask ourselves why. From my point of
> view, I see it as a problem of marketing more than OS content or
> technical excellence.

No, I think they do things better. Their installer is much better, and it's
a *lot* easier to switch. They had signed UEFI images before us,
and they enable things like firmware for wifi cards. This allows
Ubuntu to be easier for non-technical users to install computers
without understanding main vs contrib vs nonfree, how to disable
SecureBoot or what a firmware package is. We have lessons
to learn about usability and we've not learned them, and remained
stubborn about it.

They're able to do a lot of this by focusing on just a few arches, and
not every arch under the sun.

To some degree, we (as Debian) are designed to enable projects
like Ubuntu more than ever become Ubuntu.

> > and so the Ubuntu policy to work
> > upstream where possible leads people to come to Debian without
> > necessarily caring about the Debian community or users but more about
> > Ubuntu users?
>
> We are lucky this happens.

No, it's explicit messaging by Ubuntu.

I was an Ubuntu member before I was a Debian Developer.

I'd like to think I've been a stable and long-time member of the community.
I am only here because of Ubuntu. If someone tries to upload a
NEW package, they're always told to go to Debian.

>
> > Personally, I think over the years Ubuntu's Debian involvement has
> > been a net positive for Debian
>
> Indeed.
>
> > both in terms of packaging and other
> > technical changes and in terms of attracting new contributors, often
> > Ubuntu migrants end up contributing to Debian more than Ubuntu. I
> > think the same goes for derivatives in general.
>
> That's truth. I am very thankful for Canonical to contribute things like
> Grub, Python, MySQL and many other things directly in Debian. It's very
> nice that some full time employees can take care of stuff like that.
> It's also nice that some components are explicitly worked on to be the
> same in both distros. I also like the fact that they push contributors
> to work on upstream Debian.
>
> Never the less, I've seen multiple occurrences where some people vaguely
> knew what Ubuntu was, but never heard of Debian. Saw others saying wrong
> things, like Ubuntu was updating faster (which is wrong, as packages are
> updated in Sid first). And many other things of that type. Isn't it
> legitimate that I'm asking myself why? Shouldn't the Debian project try
> to question its image?

Let's fix our usability issues and maybe more "power users" will install
Debian.

>
> Cheers,
>
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
>


-- 
All programmers are playwrights, and all computers are lousy actors.

#define sizeof(x) rand()
:wq

-- 
:wq

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12599

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

 ❦ 16 mai 2020 08:09 -04, Paul Tagliamonte:

>> > Would it be fair to say that your main objection is that Ubuntu has
>> > much higher popularity than Debian
>>
>> This is what I regret, indeed. It's been like that for many years, and
>> the trend isn't reversing. We should ask ourselves why. From my point of
>> view, I see it as a problem of marketing more than OS content or
>> technical excellence.
>
> No, I think they do things better. Their installer is much better, and it's
> a *lot* easier to switch. They had signed UEFI images before us,
> and they enable things like firmware for wifi cards. This allows
> Ubuntu to be easier for non-technical users to install computers
> without understanding main vs contrib vs nonfree, how to disable
> SecureBoot or what a firmware package is. We have lessons
> to learn about usability and we've not learned them, and remained
> stubborn about it.

Also for servers:

 - official cloud images far before us (kudos to Zigo for bootstrapping
   the effort on our side)
 - PPA
 - HWE kernels

We still have some things better than Ubuntu:

 - backports
 - security support
 - not converting everything to Snaps
-- 
There is a great discovery still to be made in Literature: that of
paying literary men by the quantity they do NOT write.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12604

Hi List,

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 05:32:30PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> We still have some things better than Ubuntu:
>  - not converting everything to Snaps

Could the fact that Ubuntu is "converting everything to Snaps" impact
the current policy that "If someone tries to upload a NEW package,
they're always told to go to Debian." ?

In other words, could the contribution from Ubuntu to Debian
diminishes because more effort is put on Snaps and less effort on
improving upstream Debian packages ?

[I hope this is not too off-topic for debian-python, feel free to
point me to an archived thread somewhere else if you know one].

-- 
Nicolas Chauvat

logilab.fr - services en informatique scientifique et gestion de connaissances  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12605

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 7:12 AM Nicolas Chauvat wrote:

> In other words, could the contribution from Ubuntu to Debian
> diminishes because more effort is put on Snaps and less effort on
> improving upstream Debian packages ?

The same applies to Snap more generally as well as AppImage, Flatpak
and downloader packages. Those ecosystems are gaining mindshare with
upstream developers so distributions like Debian are going to lose
mindshare among upstreams and then among users since they get all
their apps from Flathub etc and so fewer people will be packaging for
Debian. I've already seen packages in Debian switch from being
properly packaged to just a snap installer or a downloader script.
Personally I would like to see Debian automatically generate
AppImage/Flatpak/Snap packages (and perhaps server container formats
like Docker) from existing .debs in order to offer our users and users
of other distros more ways to use Debian produced packages.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12606

Hi Thomas,

On 15.05.20 18:55, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 5/15/20 5:43 PM, jojo wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to join the list because I think my software is a valuable
>> addition to the debian universe, my ultimate goal would be to bring it
>> into Ubuntu Studio because it is music-related.
> I really think it's a shame that people join Debian just because of
> Ubuntu... :(

Feels like we have room for a little smalltalk here :-) I wouldn't put 
it this way but rather mention how unbelievable it is that Debian is the 
basis for so many other distributions! Back in 98 when I first started 
with Linux Debian was my first love (codename Potato LOL). Only Distro 
that was seemed "logic" and easy customizable IMHO. And I still dig 
Debian based over others but have to admit that I only used Linux at 
work, the past 15 years and only nowish coming back to feeling the need 
of having a Linux box at home. I have been using a Macbook the last 
years - best of both worlds: nice gui and music tools (I use Ableton 
Live mostly) and also via homebrew can use UNIX tools and great Open 
Source tools (Blender, Inkscape, Gimp, Audacity rules!!!). At work we 
have a mixture of RHEL and Ubuntu and for Hardware often there is no 
discussion wether to use something else than RedHat because of support 
and blabla. All have there advantages but Debian will ever stay in my 
heart as the one and only that got me hooked! And most importantly: It 
will be like a dream coming true, when my tool really makes its way into 
DEBIAN! OH YEAH!

One private question: What do you use? I remember that back then when I 
found out that Debian stable is pretty oldish I was always using 
testing. My teamleader recently told me that he's actually using 
unstable these days and prefers it over testing. I think if one wants 
halfway modern software there is only two options: Use Ubuntu(ish) or 
use Debian unstable? Right?

>
>> I already filed a bug report against the wnpp pseudo package but I am
>> not quite sure what would be the next step and which packaging guides it
>> is best to follow to get started with packaging and finally uploading
>> it.
> IMO, the best thing to start with is the packaging tutorial:
> apt-get install packaging-tutorial
>
> It's nicely written. Then you should read the Debian Policy Manual.
> Finally, search and read the python policy (in the wiki?) if your app is
> Python based.
>
>> Should my next step be following this tutorial on packaging?
>> https://packaging.ubuntu.com/html/packaging-new-software.html
> This guide talks about bzr. It's not in use anywhere these days, even
> Ubuntu people don't use it anymore. It's also Python 2 only, and
> therefore, we removed it from Debian.
>
> IMO, you should install sbuild to start with:
> https://wiki.debian.org/sbuild
>
> and then go from the above. Note that I don't think using dh_make is a
> good idea. It's IMO nicer to just take another Python app as example.
> Look at the team's Git for that.

Thanks so much for all this hints, I would have given up if I were alone 
here. It really is a jungle of documentation and you never know if it's 
the rigth one, if it's outdate or whatever....not easy.... I have just 
set up sbuild and it seems to run. I think I packaged hello successfully 
haha ;-)

Following your hint and am now cloning a simple python tool 
('rename-flac' seems appropriate for learning). One question: Often I 
read the workflow is to first create a source package and then the 
binary package from it. Is that true for python tools as well? I mean 
there is no "source/binary" in this sense. And this does not seem to be 
a source package but a regular package I would install as user using 
apt: https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/applications/rename-flac.git

>
>> Also some other questions arise as my tool has a dependency that I am
>> pretty sure is not in debian already. the official discogs_client - a
>> python sdk to access discogs.com rest api, and actually I forked and
>> extended it. pull-request to official repo is pending:
>> https://github.com/JOJ0/discogs_client
> Well, if you need it for your app, then it must be packaged in Debian as
> well if you intend to depend on it.

I guess I knew the answer already ;-) IMHO it's a shame that Discogs is 
not responsive at all to pull-requests in the last ~1-2 years, I would 
rather prefer if I package the official discogs_client (really 
maintained by discogs.com themselves) but to complete my task, I will 
just package my fork because it just works and has two features that I 
just require.

I suppose they will stay unresponsive even if I ask them that I would 
like to package them for Debian. I don't know what there problem is, 
either they are not really interested in a feature-complete python sdk 
or they just don't have enough time/manpower for it. Recently it seems 
they focus on their mobile app a lot (needed work, that buggy piece 
o...... ;-)))

Anyway, tell me what you think: First package my fork to get things 
done, then ask discogs.com if they want to be in debian and I would do 
it if they would finally work on some of the pulls that are open for 
almost "years" already.....

>
>> Well enough already, let's discuss stuff when I am on the list :-)
> You're talking about joining the list. But what about the Python APP
> team? Do you intend to join it?

I think I still don't understand the difference between "being on the 
debian-python list" and joining the "python app packagning team". Please 
elaborate again! Most of all: What exactly would it mean if I "join the 
team".

I also read your other message about your offer for reviewing and 
sponsoring: Thank's a lot! That's great news, will let you know when I 
finally came up with something. Will take a couple of days, hopefully 
not weeks ;-)

Thanks a lot! Have a great week!

Jojo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12607

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

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:24:23AM +0200, jojo wrote:
> One question: Often I read the workflow is to first create a source
> package and then the binary package from it. Is that true for python
> tools as well? 
Yes.

> I mean there is no "source/binary" in this sense.
It doesn't matter whether there are sources and binaries. There is still a
source package and a binary package created from it.

> And this does not seem to be a source package but a regular
> package I would install as user using apt:
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/applications/rename-flac.git
No, you cannot install a git repo with apt.
Binary packages are .deb files.

-- 
WBR, wRAR

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web