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


Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #14208

Re: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now?

From Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net>
Newsgroups linux.debian.maint.python
Subject Re: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now?
Date 2022-06-30 08:40 +0200
Message-ID <EDW0h-8avc-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <EDjrX-7Nrz-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <EDjBF-7NuN-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <EDHkB-81Ic-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 10:58:48AM -0400, Boyuan Yang wrote:
> Hi,
> [...]
> Thanks. I have uploaded an initial version to the NEW queue. The packaging
> work is at https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/pdm-pep517/ .
> 
> It is worth noting that I took the very aggressive way in stripping every
> vendored libraries, see
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/pdm-pep517/-/tree/master/debian/patches
> . This may not be ideal since the patch will need human intervention for every
> new upstream release, but anyway let's have a working version in Sid first.
> Meanwhile, any review or other types of help would be appreciated.

Hi Boyuan,

I've just taken a look; the exclusions and patching look fine to me.
Yes, there will need to be some human intervention, but there always
should be for new upstream versions.  It may well be that all that is
needed is to refresh the patch and run:

quilt push -a
rgrep _vendor pdm

(or the equivalent gbp pq push or something like that) to check that
nothing has changed.

One small change to the patch:

* In pdm/pep517/utils.py and pdm/pep517/wheel.py, there is no need to
  insert an "import packaging"

Best wishes,

   Julian

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


Thread

pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now? Boyuan Yang <byang@debian.org> - 2022-06-28 15:30 +0200
  Re: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now? Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2022-06-28 15:40 +0200
    Re: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now? Boyuan Yang <byang@debian.org> - 2022-06-29 17:00 +0200
      Re: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now? Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> - 2022-06-30 08:40 +0200
  Re: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now? Louis-Philippe Véronneau <pollo@debian.org> - 2022-06-28 17:20 +0200
    Re: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now? Boyuan Yang <byang@debian.org> - 2022-07-07 21:40 +0200
      Re: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now? Louis-Philippe Véronneau <pollo@debian.org> - 2022-07-08 08:00 +0200
      Re: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now? Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> - 2022-07-08 09:40 +0200
  Packaging of pdm (Was: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now?) Boyuan Yang <byang@debian.org> - 2022-07-03 00:50 +0200
    Re: Packaging of pdm (Was: pdm-pep517: Shall we package it now?) Louis-Philippe Véronneau <pollo@debian.org> - 2022-07-08 09:20 +0200

csiph-web