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

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



mh, probably I'm missing something:

- is pyimport-relative only available for 2.4?
- is pyimport-relative an incompatible implementation of relative
imports as present in python >=2.5 ?
- would it be possible to "port" to relative import as in python >=
2.5 and declare pydbgr as only available for >= 2.5 (Lenny has 2.5 as
default...)?

IMHO, either use the relimp as in python >= 2.5 or don't use at all
(as Piotr just suggested).

Regards,
Sandro

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:26, Luca Falavigna <dktrkranz@debian.org> wrote:
> 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.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
>
>  .''`.
>  : :' :   Luca Falavigna <dktrkranz@debian.org>
>  `. `'
>   `-
>
>



-- 
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi


Reply to: