Re: Removing some python3-* packages
On 25 August 2015 at 10:37, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> wrote:
> On Aug 25, 2015, at 10:03 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
>
>>On 25 August 2015 at 09:57, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> wrote:
>>...
>>> By all means, if there isn't any
>>> significant difference between a standalone package and what's available in
>>> the current supported Python 3 version, let's not ship unnecessary binary
>>> packages.
>>
>>Even at the cost of having to patch upstream projects?
>
> Sorry, I'm not sure what the question means.
Lets take Ironic. While it supports Python 2.7+ and 3.4+ it will
depend on 'mock' for unit testing.
If Debian has only Python 2.7 and 3.5 and wants to build Ironic for
only Python 3.5 - which is a reasonable thing, then 'mock' is needed
(because Ironic depends on 'mock').
We could:
- patch Ironic to use unittest.mock on Python 3.5
- patch the stdlib to make 'mock' be an alias to unittest.mock
- include 'python3-mock' as a binary package
- not run the Ironic unit tests.
Perhaps to you 'thing we package X uses library Y' implies 'binary
package X is uncessary' - but the thing is that 'binary package X' may
not be a significant difference vs the Python version in Debian at the
time - even if there are significant differences vs older still
upstream-supported Python versions - which is what the developer
ecosystem will be referencing.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins <rbtcollins@hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
Reply to: