[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Comments regarding pyimport-relative_0.1.0-1_amd64.changes

This is relative to pyimport-relative package, currently in NEW. These
are considerations taken with Debian maintainer, and before going any
further, I'd like to share some thoughts with Debian Python maintainers.

Il 12/05/2010 21.24, Yaroslav Halchenko ha scritto:
> Hi Luca,
> This package is the dependency for ITP-ed pydbgr (I am yet to package
> few other little python modules which are needed before pydbgr gets
> uploaded as well).  I would love to have pydbgr packaged so it could be
> available for lenny backports, which runs 2.4.  I know it is a weak
> argument altogether, but that is what I would need to have, and that is
> what pydbgr relies upon atm.
> Also there are some differences, I believe, with stock relative import
> present >= 2.5; If you ok it, I could expose your question to upstream
> author to clarify in this thread the differences (on top of being just
> compatible with 2.4) in concise manner, since our  discussion (in
> private) was too convoluted and now I've forgotten all the arguments.
> On Wed, 12 May 2010, Luca Falavigna wrote:
>> Hi,
>> AFAIK, relative imports are available from 2.5, is this package really needed?
>> Cheers,
>> Luca

Personally, I think it's better asking pydbgr upstream to see if there's
chance to adjust code to use relative imports provided by python2.5,
unless implementation is way too different to be impossible to do otherwise.



 : :' :   Luca Falavigna <dktrkranz@debian.org>
 `. `'

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: