Python 2.7 for Squeeze?
Thomas Waldmann
I am new to this list (but I have skimmed last few months of the
archive), so excuse me if I have missed some discussion.
I am one of the core devs of MoinMoin Wiki and we currently require
python 2.6 for MoinMoin 2.0 (alpha). There are some reasons why we would
maybe like to require 2.7:
* OrderedDict
* faster io lib
* some other features, less bugs, better maintenance
* in general: better base for future Python 3 work
Problem: moin should be easily installable, even for unexperienced linux
users / admins. Not having the right python version in/for stable
release is no good for this, so debian (and maybe also some other linux
dists for which i care less) currently keeps us back at 2.6.
So I had a look at squeeze-backports, but not even there one can get
2.7.
Notes:
* i am not talking about the default "python", but just a "python2.7"
binary, so it would not mean any interference with code not explicitly
using it.
* not having python2.7 available out there delays python3 migration for
everybody
* afaik wheezy release as stable is expected in 2013, too long to wait
for that
So, is anybody working on putting python2.7 into squeeze-backports or do
I need to work on that myself? (I don't have much experience with debian
packaging / policy, so I could use my time more productively on
developping moin - but if nobody else cares, I'ld try to make a package)
If there was also virtualenv/pip there, i guess that would be enough for
us (and many other projects) for now.
Cheers,
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317477329.6831.20.camel@x300
Miguel Landaeta
> So, is anybody working on putting python2.7 into squeeze-backports or do
> I need to work on that myself? (I don't have much experience with debian
> packaging / policy, so I could use my time more productively on
> developping moin - but if nobody else cares, I'ld try to make a package)
You can take a look at [1]. I rebuilt it without modifications but it probably
needs some testing.
Are you aware that preparing a backport is not an one-time thing, right?
If you sign-up for backport maintenance of such widely used package
like python2.7, you will have to keep an eye on it during all its lifetime
backporting bugfixes and security updates.
I can help with that but you have to find a DD willing to upload this backport.
Cheers,
1. http://alioth.debian.org/~nomadium-guest/debian/squeeze-backports/python2.7_2.7.2-5~bpo60+1.dsc
--
Miguel Landaeta, miguel at miguel.cc
secure email with PGP 0x7D8967E9 available at http://keyserver.pgp.com/
"Faith means not wanting to know what is true." -- Nietzsche
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Scott Kitterman
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Thomas Waldmann <tw-p...@gmx.de> wrote:
> > So, is anybody working on putting python2.7 into squeeze-backports or do
> > I need to work on that myself? (I don't have much experience with debian
> > packaging / policy, so I could use my time more productively on
> > developping moin - but if nobody else cares, I'ld try to make a package)
>
> It looks like python2.7 is easily backporteable to squeeze.
> You can take a look at [1]. I rebuilt it without modifications but it
> probably needs some testing.
>
> Are you aware that preparing a backport is not an one-time thing, right?
> If you sign-up for backport maintenance of such widely used package
> like python2.7, you will have to keep an eye on it during all its lifetime
> backporting bugfixes and security updates.
>
> I can help with that but you have to find a DD willing to upload this
> backport.
Backporting python2.7 by itself probably won't help you that much. You'll
also need to backport/update python-defaults and then rebuild any third party
extensions you need. Depending on what it is you're after, it's a lot more
than just the interpreter backport (which is, by itself, probably not that
hard).
Scott K
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4453566.dlxrfZ2frN@scott-latitude-e6320
Thomas Waldmann
> > It looks like python2.7 is easily backporteable to squeeze.
Good news! :)
> > You can take a look at [1]. I rebuilt it without modifications but it
> > probably needs some testing.
I'll test it with virtualenv later.
> > Are you aware that preparing a backport is not an one-time thing, right?
> > If you sign-up for backport maintenance of such widely used package
> > like python2.7, you will have to keep an eye on it during all its lifetime
> > backporting bugfixes and security updates.
Well, if I understood it right, it is mostly recompiling / repackaging
the current stuff from wheezy.
I guess I could do that, although I'ld prefer some experienced DD or
developer using debian would do it (I am using ubuntu on my desktops /
development machines, but I could create some VM, of course).
> > I can help with that but you have to find a DD willing to upload this
> > backport.
OK, any DD here willing to review / help with this?
> Backporting python2.7 by itself probably won't help you that much. You'll
> also need to backport/update python-defaults
What's "python-defaults"? I could not find a file or package with that
name.
> and then rebuild any third party extensions you need.
I guess I would only care for very few packages, primarily virtualenv.
Because if you have that, you can install what you need into a virtual
env.
Maybe checking whether / how mod-wsgi works with 2.7 would also be
interesting.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317636904.17505.8.camel@x300
Stefano Rivera
> > > It looks like python2.7 is easily backporteable to squeeze.
> Good news! :)
Of course most other upstreams that want their code to run on an
existing server install, with minimal hassle, support Python 2.6 or even
2.5. The enterprise distributions move *very* slowly. I know of people
complaining that their deployment environment only has 2.4...
> Well, if I understood it right, it is mostly recompiling / repackaging
> the current stuff from wheezy.
That would be required to fix some bugs (wheezy doesn't even have 2.7 as
default yet, but that'll happen in the next week or so).
Many packages will support 2.7, but some of them will need to be rebuilt
to support it (i.e. C extensions, or packages using dh_python2)
I suspect that such rebuilding probably couldn't happen in Debian's
backports, as it would impact many packages.
> > > I can help with that but you have to find a DD willing to upload this
> > > backport.
> OK, any DD here willing to review / help with this?
You actually need someone on the backports team.
> > Backporting python2.7 by itself probably won't help you that much. You'll
> > also need to backport/update python-defaults
> What's "python-defaults"? I could not find a file or package with that
> name.
python-defaults is a source package. It builds the "python" package,
"python-all", etc. This determines what verions of python are available
and supported.
If you were to add 2.7 as a supported version, you'd have to touch
python-support and python-central as well. They hardcode supported
python versions. And before you could do that, you'd need to ensure that
every pure-python module is 2.7-compatible or has XS-Python-Version: <<
2.7 (or equivalent) in the source package.
Or you'd run into bugs like these:
http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bts-usertags.cgi?tag=python2.4-incompatible&user=debian-python%40lists.debian.org
> I guess I would only care for very few packages, primarily virtualenv.
> Because if you have that, you can install what you need into a virtual
> env.
virtualenv uses python-support, so to get it to work under 2.7, you'd
have to change python-support, which means everything else using
python-support would have to be 2.7 compatible.
Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic, but this sounds like an impossibly
big task for doing properly in debian-backports.
SR
--
Stefano Rivera
http://tumbleweed.org.za/
H: +27 21 465 6908 C: +27 72 419 8559 UCT: x3127
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2011100311...@bach.rivera.co.za
Barry Warsaw
On Oct 03, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Thomas Waldmann wrote:
>I guess I could do that, although I'ld prefer some experienced DD or
>developer using debian would do it (I am using ubuntu on my desktops /
>development machines, but I could create some VM, of course).
Not to discourage you working on useful Debian tasks, but if you're using
Ubuntu for development and production, then using Launchpad PPAs might be a
better way to go.
I have and will be maintaining a PPA for providing Python 2.7 to Lucid. This
is ostensibly so that the Launchpad team can port their code to Python 2.7
independent of porting it to Ubuntu 12.04 (the next LTS). I don't intend to
support every package, just the ones critical to Launchpad. However, you can
base your own PPA off of mine and build any additional packages you need
there.
https://launchpad.net/~pythoneers/+archive/lts
Anyway, since this is Ubuntu, it might be better to discuss it further on an
Ubuntu specific mailing list, or you can contact me directly for more
information.
Cheers,
-Barry
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111003095...@resist.wooz.org
Thomas Waldmann
> virtualenv uses python-support, so to get it to work under 2.7, you'd
> have to change python-support, which means everything else using
> python-support would have to be 2.7 compatible.
>
>
> Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic, but this sounds like an impossibly
> big task for doing properly in debian-backports.
I didn't know it is all that complicated and interdependant (and if
something is like that, it maybe should be questioned whether it needs
to be like that - but I leave that to the debian developers).
Meanwhile it sounds like only requiring >= 2.6 for the next release and
just delaying python2.7-based preparation work for python3 compatibility
to a later release is the easier way to go. :|
Hopefully it will be a non-issue then when that stuff is going to be
released. For development it is not a big issue for me as I am using
ubuntu, which has a more fresh python anyway (and I also have
some /usr/local/ manually installed pythons for testing) - I was
primarily concerned about easy release deployment (where many people are
using debian, including me).
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317731301.26692.20.camel@x300