On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 03:57:07PM +0200, Thomas Spura wrote: > On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:22:14 -0400 > Neal Becker wrote: > > > Thomas Spura wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 08:36:23 -0400 > > > Neal Becker wrote: > > > > > >> I have started porting to python3. So far I have a patch for > > >> fpconst. I have not so far been able to contact upstream. > > >> > > >> Maybe we should start a SIG for this? > > >> > > > > > >>From time to time, I try to enable a python3 subpackage and open a > > >>bug, > > > so the original maintainer accept that change to the package. > > > If upstream released an extra python3 package, I sometimes package > > > that and get it in fedora. > > > > > > I don't think we need a python3 SIG for that. Isn't the python SIG > > > enought? ;-) > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Python > > > > > +1 Python SIG is small but reasonably active. We've worked on the python-2.x rebuilds and python-3.x (smaller package set) rebuilds together. > > Going forward, we should expect the current fedora packagers to > > provide python3 versions? So bug reports (patches for python3) for > > fedora python packages should be directed to the respective > > maintainers? > > > > It depends on the respective upstream, some upstreams release two > different tar balls for python2 and python3 (e.g. chardet). Then we > need two different packages, if not it's possible to do it in one spec. > See: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Common_SRPM_vs_split_SRPMs > > But if the maintainer of the python2 package hesitates to build a > python3 package and you want one, you cannot force him to do so... > Then I don't see another way, than submit a new package review request > for the python3 package. > > So to answer your question: > I don't 'expect' the current fedora > packagers to provide python3 versions, but I 'hope' they do so... > > In your case, you still need to try to contact upstream, or you are > doing a fork (see > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Subpackages). > In particular, that section says not to package a module for python3 without upstream support. If upstream is not responsive (either at all or specifically doesn't want to make a python3 package) you *can* fork it and start a python3 version. However, you are forking and becoming upstream for the forked version -- so you need to budget your time for that and make upstream releases (probably on pypi), etc. This would also make it a case of having two upstream tarballs and therefore two packages in Fedora. One last note -- I've been talking with Barry Warsaw (mailman author, upstream python hacker, one of the python guys for Ubuntu) about the possibility of creating a common project for distributions to get together and help port modules to python3. If anyone has some ideas about requirements for doing that, I'd be interested in hearing ideas. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgp_x1q9_5Kb6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
