Re: PEP 453 affects Debian packaging of Python packages
On 2013-09-20 13:52, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> It's not about keeping the libraries up to date, it's about keeping the
> applications up to date.
...
> Hell, we shouldn't even introduce a module unless it has an app using
> it.
I tend to disagree here (slightly). Too me, it is very important,
that Debian is a perfect platform for different applications,
even if not packaged for Debian. E.g. Debian contains all
libraries and Python modules needed for an application my
company does. I heard the same from OpenERP developers. They use
Ubuntu and Debian and find it very useful, that everything they
need is available, be it a Python module or nginx.
If there were Python modules missing, it would make Debian a less
usable tool for us and probably many others. Using virtualenv and
pip to play with a new module is nice, but not necessarily an
option for serious application development, e.g. because you have
to think how to deploy the application later. That's why I want to
see all useful Python modules in Debian, even if no Debian
package uses them. If somebody files an ITP or RFP, they know,
what it is good for :~)
To me, having Debian packages of Python modules does not only mean
the package is available via apt-get instead of pip. It does also
mean, that at least one Debian maintainer looked at the usability
and maybe quality of the code, that DD and FTP masters accepted
the license, that I have the same bug tracker available for the
Python module, web server and kernel. Debian packages are checked
by others, whether one can still build and install them, etc.
Reply to: