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

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #9629 > unrolled thread

python3 for pysrs

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

Contents

  python3 for pysrs Sandro Knauß <hefee@debian.org> - 2017-07-16 20:40 +0200
    Re: python3 for pysrs Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> - 2017-07-17 00:50 +0200
      Re: python3 for pysrs Sandro Knauß <bugs@sandroknauss.de> - 2017-07-17 14:40 +0200
        Re: python3 for pysrs Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2017-07-17 18:30 +0200
          Re: python3 for pysrs Sandro Knauß <hefee@debian.org> - 2017-07-24 16:10 +0200
            Re: python3 for pysrs Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2017-07-31 06:20 +0200
    Re: pysrs - other questions Sandro Knauß <hefee@debian.org> - 2017-07-24 18:20 +0200

#9629 — python3 for pysrs

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

Hey,

I'm currently porting pysrs to python3 and sofar I got all tests running for 
python2 and python3 *yeah*. But the porting was mostly adding encode()/
decode() to many parts of the module. And I'm unsure, if the API is now in a 
good shape, or if it is mostly unusable for users, because I mixed bytes/
strings to much. Can somebody help here to give a good look from "outside"? 
[0]

I also see these messages:
python-srs: unused substitution variable ${python:Provides}                    
python-srs: unused substitution variable ${python:Versions} 

so far I understand https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ch-module_packages.html i should ignore these messages.

And at least the testSRS.py is not available in build dir, so these tests are 
not runned. Should I override dh_auto_tests? or PYBUILD_TEST_ARGS_python2/3?  
What is the recommended way?

Best Regards,

sandro

[0] https://anonscm.debian.org/git/python-modules/packages/pysrs.git  

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#9630

Sandro Knauß <hefee@debian.org> writes:

> I'm currently porting pysrs to python3 and sofar I got all tests
> running for python2 and python3 *yeah*.

Congratulations!

> But the porting was mostly adding encode()/ decode() to many parts of
> the module. And I'm unsure, if the API is now in a good shape, or if
> it is mostly unusable for users

This is work you're doing in collaboration with the ‘pysrs’ upstream
developers, right? You are aiming to get users to test this, and get it
into a release, before doing any of this in Debian. Is that correct?

I think that porting a work to Python 3 is not appropriate for a Debian
patch. That should be done only in a maintained upstream work; maybe a
fork, but certainly not just a patch on the released upstream work for
Python 2 only.

-- 
 \            “Madness is rare in individuals, but in groups, parties, |
  `\            nations and ages it is the rule.” —Friedrich Nietzsche |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

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

#9631

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

Hey,

> This is work you're doing in collaboration with the ‘pysrs’ upstream
> developers, right? You are aiming to get users to test this, and get it
> into a release, before doing any of this in Debian. Is that correct?

well because upstream has not add any patch for three years, I think upstream 
is dead. I'll send upsteam also a mail with my propolsoal for pysrs python3, 
but I think I'll don't get response. But before asking upstream I would like 
to have somebody looking at my python3 changes if they are going into the 
right direction.

> I think that porting a work to Python 3 is not appropriate for a Debian
> patch. That should be done only in a maintained upstream work; maybe a
> fork, but certainly not just a patch on the released upstream work for
> Python 2 only.

Yes I know, that this is not really part of an Debian patch, but because 
upstream is not doing anything, I started now to push python3 support. And I 
think at this list there are many people how saw many python3 support patches, 
to give some hints, where to pay attention.
Well if upstream is dead I'll need to fork it.

Best Regards,

sandro

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

#9632

On July 17, 2017 8:27:45 AM EDT, "Sandro Knauß" <bugs@sandroknauss.de> wrote:
>Hey,
>
>> This is work you're doing in collaboration with the ‘pysrs’ upstream
>> developers, right? You are aiming to get users to test this, and get
>it
>> into a release, before doing any of this in Debian. Is that correct?
>
>well because upstream has not add any patch for three years, I think
>upstream 
>is dead. I'll send upsteam also a mail with my propolsoal for pysrs
>python3, 
>but I think I'll don't get response. But before asking upstream I would
>like 
>to have somebody looking at my python3 changes if they are going into
>the 
>right direction.
>
>> I think that porting a work to Python 3 is not appropriate for a
>Debian
>> patch. That should be done only in a maintained upstream work; maybe
>a
>> fork, but certainly not just a patch on the released upstream work
>for
>> Python 2 only.
>
>Yes I know, that this is not really part of an Debian patch, but
>because 
>upstream is not doing anything, I started now to push python3 support.
>And I 
>think at this list there are many people how saw many python3 support
>patches, 
>to give some hints, where to pay attention.
>Well if upstream is dead I'll need to fork it.

I know the upstream developer.  I would recommend that you contact him.  He's been gradually moving from Sourceforge to GitHub and I expect he'd move pysrs if you offered to port it.  

My understanding is he views it as doing what it's supposed to do, so rather than dead, it's merely sleeping.

In addition to email, you can usually find him on IRC at #spf on irc.perl.org.

Scott K

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

#9636

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

Hey,

> I know the upstream developer.  I would recommend that you contact him. 
> He's been gradually moving from Sourceforge to GitHub and I expect he'd
> move pysrs if you offered to port it.

Okay done - mail sent, than we see what happens :)

Sandro

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

#9654

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

On Monday, July 24, 2017 03:49:39 PM Sandro Knauß wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> > I know the upstream developer.  I would recommend that you contact him.
> > He's been gradually moving from Sourceforge to GitHub and I expect he'd
> > move pysrs if you offered to port it.
> 
> Okay done - mail sent, than we see what happens :)

I understand it's on github now.

Scott K

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

#9638 — Re: pysrs - other questions

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

Hey,

okay the one part about the patch for python3 was discussed, but my others 
questions are still unanswered :(

> I also see these messages:
> python-srs: unused substitution variable ${python:Provides}
> python-srs: unused substitution variable ${python:Versions}
> so far I understand
> https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ch-module_packag
> es.html i should ignore these messages.

> And at least the testSRS.py is not available in build dir, so these tests
> are not runned. Should I override dh_auto_tests? or
> PYBUILD_TEST_ARGS_python2/3? What is the recommended way?

sandro

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web