[ for Miguel, who's just joining us, we're talking about the future of
GpgME in debian, and in particular its higher-level language bindings.
please see the thread at
https://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-gnupg-maint/2016-September/004170.html
for more context. ]
Hi Justus--
On Sat 2016-09-10 19:17:11 +0200, Justus Winter wrote:
> Just a quick clarification...
>
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> writes:
>> pyme (python-pyme and python3-pyme)--
>
> There was no pyme for Python 3 before we ported it,
ah, you're right of course, and i was confused.
> and our in-tree pyme does not work for Python 2 *yet*, but AIUI Kai
> (CC'ed) contacted the current pyme maintainer and he is ok with us
> taking over the Python 2 version.
Great.
> The plan is to make our in-tree version work with Python 2 as well, but
> we are not there yet. We will look into that soon.
So if that doesn't make it into the 1.7.0 release but 1.7.0 does make it
into debian stretch, the gpgme1.0 package can just ship the python3
bindings, and debian will ship an older version of the python2-pyme
package. That would be a little confusing, but not the end of the
world, i guess.
I do note that there's a python3-gpgme, but that is a python3 binding
for https://launchpad.net/products/pygpgme (maintained by Miguel Di
Ciurcio Filho), cc'ed here), but the only package in debian which
depends on that is "assword", which i'm part of upstream on, and i'd be
happy to convert assword to using pyme instead if GnuPG upstream is
maintaining a python3 port there directly.
Miguel, would you be interested in helping with the maintenance of gpgme
itself in debian? If assword doesn't depend on libpython3-gpgme any
longer, and upstream is maintaining python3-pyme, maybe we could just
drop python3-gpgme from debian entirely to reduce confusion for people
looking for a python gpg binding?
--dkg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature