Re: Blends and (astronomy) meta-packages
Hi Ole,
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:24:09AM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> writes:
> > I also do not feel educated enough to decide between these three
> > options. On the contrary I have a foruth one: I could imagine that
> > there might be users who are interested in an astronomy-dev package
> > which installs development tools for astronomy applications
> > independently whether they might be Python or not. To get this
> > I'd recommend the blends-dev framework.
>
> I must say that I didn't understand your proposal.
>
> The nice thing about python libs is that they usually serve as end-user
> applications (though ipython), and also as development packages. The
> ease of conversion between an interactive analysis to a programs is IMO
> what makes Python so successfull (and therefore maybe an
> python-astronomy package would be useful).
There exist packages that contain applications written in Python where
the user does not really need to know in what language it is written in
(as for any user application). As far as I understand packages
featuring such applications should not feature the 'python-' prefix in
front of the package name. Python *modules* are useful to develop
Python applications and usually these come in a python-* and a
python3-package. May be there is something in between but that split
can be drawn through close to all Python packages I know. And than
there might be exceptions which serve a purpose inbetween and you can
create from one source package pure applications to run at the users
computer and modules that help to program similar applications. I would
split up these parts of one source package into different binary
packages and put them into different Blends tasks - one in the user
oriented task and one in a development task.
May be in the field of astronomy this is different but that's the
observation I did in several fields.
> Back to the [python-]astropy-all package: in the moment, the best would
> probably be to have it separate. I am still not sure whether it fits to
> the idea of a "blends task".
I'm lacking the necessary knowledge to comment on this.
> If it would be created independently, would
> it be easy to integrate as a blends task if I change my mind?
There are tools (package blends-dev) that turn a simple tasks file into
a metapackage. If you have a manually craftet metapackage you can
probably decide to copy the Depends/Recommends and Suggests into a tasks
file if you want to turn it into a Blends task. However, my
recommendation to start right now with the design of *some* Astronomy
tasks (not only for Python applications) remains and I recommend to
study the design of other Blends tasks.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: