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

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #13229 > unrolled thread

Request to Join DPT

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

Contents

  Request to Join DPT Lorenz Schori <lo@znerol.ch> - 2021-02-21 13:00 +0100
    Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT] Elena ``of Valhalla'' <valhalla@debian.org> - 2021-02-21 17:00 +0100
      Re: Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT] Lorenz Schori <lo@znerol.ch> - 2021-02-21 18:00 +0100
        Re: Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT] Lorenz Schori <lo@znerol.ch> - 2021-02-24 19:00 +0100
          Re: Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT] Elena ``of Valhalla'' <valhalla@debian.org> - 2021-03-11 10:10 +0100
            Re: Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT] Lorenz Schori <lo@znerol.ch> - 2021-03-19 17:10 +0100
    Re: Request to Join DPT Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2021-03-26 11:10 +0100

#13229 — Request to Join DPT

Hi,

I am the author of Prometheus PVE Exporter[1]. I recently discovered
that there is only one somewhat exotic dependency left (proxmoxer[2])
which needs some love before Prometheus PVE Exporter itself could be
packaged for Debian. I'd like to bring that dependency up-to-date in a
first step and then propose to include Prometheus PVE Exporter after
that.

My salsa username is: znerol

I did read and I do accept the Debian Python Team Policy:
https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst

Cheers,
Lorenz

1) https://github.com/prometheus-pve/prometheus-pve-exporter
2) https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/proxmoxer
3) https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/index.html

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#13230 — Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT]

On 2021-02-21 at 12:50:16 +0100, Lorenz Schori wrote:
> I am the author of Prometheus PVE Exporter[1]. I recently discovered
> that there is only one somewhat exotic dependency left (proxmoxer[2])
> which needs some love before Prometheus PVE Exporter itself could be
> packaged for Debian. I'd like to bring that dependency up-to-date in a
> first step and then propose to include Prometheus PVE Exporter after

Uh, I missed the fact that there is a new upstream version of proxmoxer,
thanks for letting me notice.

Have you already checked how significant the difference is? I suspect
that the delta would be too much to be reasonable even under the current
freeze rules (and Prometheus PVE Exporter as a new package would need to
target bookworm anyway): what would you think about an upload of updated
proxmoxer to experimental?

-- 
Elena ``of Valhalla''

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

#13231 — Re: Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT]

Hi Elena,

On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 16:37:54 +0100
Elena ``of Valhalla'' <valhalla@debian.org> wrote:

> [...]
> Have you already checked how significant the difference is? I suspect
> that the delta would be too much to be reasonable even under the
> current freeze rules (and Prometheus PVE Exporter as a new package
> would need to target bookworm anyway):

Version 1.0.4 has some small fixes for the ssh backend and some
improvements for the http backend. Nothing major though. If it is
viable to include that in bullseye, then why not. Also note that
upstream changed to proxmoxer/proxmoxer.

$ git diff --stat upstream/1.0.3...upstream/1.0.4 | grep py
 proxmoxer/__init__.py                   |   2 +-
 proxmoxer/backends/base_ssh.py          |   2 +-
 proxmoxer/backends/https.py             |   5 +-
 proxmoxer/core.py                       |  25 ++-
 setup.py                                |   2 +-
 tests/base/base_ssh_suite.py            |   8 +-

Version 1.1.0/1.1.1 introduces token authentication. There is no reason
to rush that into bullseye though. There is still the option to push
it to backports if people like that feature.

> what would you think about an upload of updated proxmoxer to
> experimental?

Sure! Any progress is very welcome!

Cheers,
Lorenz

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

#13232 — Re: Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT]

Hi,

On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 17:50:43 +0100
Lorenz Schori <lo@znerol.ch> wrote:

> Version 1.0.4 has some small fixes for the ssh backend and some
> improvements for the http backend. Nothing major though. If it is
> viable to include that in bullseye, then why not. Also note that
> upstream changed to proxmoxer/proxmoxer.

Would it help if I open merge requests for that (one against
pristine-tar, one against upstream and one against debian/master for
changelog etc.).

Cheers,
Lorenz

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

#13273 — Re: Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT]

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

On 2021-02-24 at 18:53:19 +0100, Lorenz Schori wrote:
> > Version 1.0.4 has some small fixes for the ssh backend and some
> > improvements for the http backend. Nothing major though. If it is
> > viable to include that in bullseye, then why not. Also note that
> > upstream changed to proxmoxer/proxmoxer.
> 
> Would it help if I open merge requests for that (one against
> pristine-tar, one against upstream and one against debian/master for
> changelog etc.).

Yes, please, a merge request would help: I've looked into it a few times
already and wasn't able to finish it in the time I had.

But since it's going into experimental, wouldn't it be better to package
the latest released version (1.1.1), or possibly even 1.2.0b1 (the very
latest version on pypi)?

-- 
Elena ``of Valhalla''

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

#13288 — Re: Updating proxmoxer [Was: Re: Request to Join DPT]

Hi Elena,

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 09:41:41 +0100
Elena ``of Valhalla'' <valhalla@debian.org> wrote:

> Yes, please, a merge request would help: I've looked into it a few
> times already and wasn't able to finish it in the time I had.
> 
> But since it's going into experimental, wouldn't it be better to
> package the latest released version (1.1.1), or possibly even 1.2.0b1
> (the very latest version on pypi)?

I followed the docs in the wiki[1] and it looks like gbp does its thing
across three branches (debian/master, upstream and pristine-tar). Thus
I opened three MRs with the result:

https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/proxmoxer/-/merge_requests/2
https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/proxmoxer/-/merge_requests/3
https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/proxmoxer/-/merge_requests/4

I used tar files downloaded from github for the intermediate releases
and `gbp import-orig --pristine-tar --uscan` for the most recent one. I
guess that the entries in the changelog could be squashed (unless we'd
like to release 1.1.1 separately from 1.2.0b1).

1) https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging#New_upstream_release

HTH
Lorenz

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

#13296

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

Hi,

sorry for waiting and welcome :)

ne 21. 2. 2021 v 12:57 odesílatel Lorenz Schori <lo@znerol.ch> napsal:

> Hi,
>
> I am the author of Prometheus PVE Exporter[1]. I recently discovered
> that there is only one somewhat exotic dependency left (proxmoxer[2])
> which needs some love before Prometheus PVE Exporter itself could be
> packaged for Debian. I'd like to bring that dependency up-to-date in a
> first step and then propose to include Prometheus PVE Exporter after
> that.
>
> My salsa username is: znerol
>
> I did read and I do accept the Debian Python Team Policy:
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/blob/master/policy.rst
>
> Cheers,
> Lorenz
>
> 1) https://github.com/prometheus-pve/prometheus-pve-exporter
> 2) https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/proxmoxer
> 3) https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/index.html
>
>

-- 
S pozdravem/Best regards
 Ondřej Nový

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web