Re: drop pygtk alternative

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: drop pygtk alternative

Loïc Minier
        Hi,

Sebastien Bacher wrote:

> At the moment both python-gtk-1.2 and python-gtk2 ship a pygtk.py which
> allow you to do "pygtk.require('1.2')/pygtk.require('2.0')" to specify
> what version to use.
> There is an altenative for that because other way the files would
> conflict and people are free to install 1.2 or 2.0 or both.
>
> Upstream has just splitted pygtk to pygobject/pygtk, pygobject ships
> pygtk.py now and I'm wondering if we have any interest to keep the
> alternative? Is there people who still need to install pygtk1.2 without
> pygtk2?

 If I understand correctly, the pygtk.py of version 2.0 works to select
 version 1.2 or 2.0?  But in this case, what would you replace the
 alternatives with?  A Depends from the 1.2 version on the 2.0 one?

   Cheers,

--
Loïc Minier <[hidden email]>
Current Earth status:   NOT DESTROYED


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: drop pygtk alternative

Sebastien Bacher-2
Le mercredi 01 mars 2006 à 22:18 +0100, Loïc Minier a écrit :

>         Hi,
>
> Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> > At the moment both python-gtk-1.2 and python-gtk2 ship a pygtk.py which
> > allow you to do "pygtk.require('1.2')/pygtk.require('2.0')" to specify
> > what version to use.
> > There is an altenative for that because other way the files would
> > conflict and people are free to install 1.2 or 2.0 or both.
> >
> > Upstream has just splitted pygtk to pygobject/pygtk, pygobject ships
> > pygtk.py now and I'm wondering if we have any interest to keep the
> > alternative? Is there people who still need to install pygtk1.2 without
> > pygtk2?
>
>  If I understand correctly, the pygtk.py of version 2.0 works to select
>  version 1.2 or 2.0?  But in this case, what would you replace the
>  alternatives with?  A Depends from the 1.2 version on the 2.0 one?

pygtk.py allows to specify the gtk version by using "pygtk.require()",
dropping the alternative would mean dropping the possibility to have 1.2
by default for the system. Every package using 1.2 will have to use
"pygtk.require('1.2')" from then. At the moment packages probably do it
already or pygtk.require('2.0') since both can be default and better to
specify the one you want to use


Cheers,

Sebastien Bacher



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: drop pygtk alternative

Loïc Minier
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> pygtk.py allows to specify the gtk version by using "pygtk.require()",
> dropping the alternative would mean dropping the possibility to have 1.2
> by default for the system. Every package using 1.2 will have to use
> "pygtk.require('1.2')" from then. At the moment packages probably do it
> already or pygtk.require('2.0') since both can be default and better to
> specify the one you want to use

 But which source would be providing pygtk.py?

 If a source change is required in packages depending on pygtk, I think
 a NEWS.Debian stating about the change is important to have, as well as
 some warning here and perhaps on -devel or -devel-announce (otherwise
 maintainers of not so commonly used packages won't notice the
 incompatibility).

--
Loïc Minier <[hidden email]>
Current Earth status:   NOT DESTROYED


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: drop pygtk alternative

Sebastien Bacher-2
Le jeudi 02 mars 2006 à 10:52 +0100, Loïc Minier a écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2006, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> > pygtk.py allows to specify the gtk version by using "pygtk.require()",
> > dropping the alternative would mean dropping the possibility to have 1.2
> > by default for the system. Every package using 1.2 will have to use
> > "pygtk.require('1.2')" from then. At the moment packages probably do it
> > already or pygtk.require('2.0') since both can be default and better to
> > specify the one you want to use
>
>  But which source would be providing pygtk.py?

python2.n-gobject


>  If a source change is required in packages depending on pygtk,

A change will be required for people who have pygtk set to 1.2 by
default now and don't use pygtk.require('1.2'). If you use pygtk 2.0
stuff no change is required


Cheers,

Sebastien Bacher



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: drop pygtk alternative

Loïc Minier
        Hi,

On Thu, Mar 02, 2006, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> >  But which source would be providing pygtk.py?
> python2.n-gobject

 Ok, so there are two problems here:
 - what about packages having a Depend on python-gtk-1.2?  should
   python-gtk-1.2 depend on a python2.n-gobject to get pygtk.py?
 - which one of the python2.n-gobject will hold pygtk.py?

> A change will be required for people who have pygtk set to 1.2 by
> default now and don't use pygtk.require('1.2'). If you use pygtk 2.0
> stuff no change is required

 Ok, in summary, if both the 1.2 and 2.0 packages are installed, the
 bahvior of import pygtk might change:

 Now:
A/ import pygtk => 1.2,           depend on python-gtk-1.2 [1]
B/ pygtk.require('1.2') => 1.2,   depend on python-gtk-1.2 [1]
C/ pygtk.require('2.0') => 2.0,   depend on python-gtk2 [2]

 After:
A/ import pygtk => 2.0,           depend on python-gtk2 [2]
B/ pygtk.require('1.2') => 1.2,   depend on python-gtk-1.2 [1]
C/ pygtk.require('2.0') => 2.0,   depend on python-gtk2 [2]

 (So we need to announce the change for people using merely import
 pygtk, without any require().)

 The file are currently shipped as follow:
 python2.3-gtk-1.2:
   /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python-gtk-1.2
 python2.3-gtk2:
   /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python2.3-gtk2
 python2.4-gtk2:
   /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/pygtk.py.python2.4-gtk2

 And would switch to:
 python2.3-gtk-1.2:
   /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python-gtk-1.2
 python2.3-gobject:
   /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python2.3-gobject
 python2.4-gobject:
   /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/pygtk.py.python2.4-gobject

 That's a bit surprising, I don't understand why pygtk.py has to move
 from the python-gtk2 package to the python-gobject package.


[1] python-gtk-1.2 for the default python version or 2.3
[2] python-gtk2 for the default python version, python2.3-gtk2 for 2.3,
    python2.4-gtk2 for 2.4

--
Loïc Minier <[hidden email]>
Current Earth status:   NOT DESTROYED


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: drop pygtk alternative

Loïc Minier
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006, Loïc Minier wrote:
>  Ok, so there are two problems here:
>  - what about packages having a Depend on python-gtk-1.2?  should
>    python-gtk-1.2 depend on a python2.n-gobject to get pygtk.py?
>  - which one of the python2.n-gobject will hold pygtk.py?

 (Disregard these sentences, they were left behind the analysis of the
 current package contents I made.)

--
Loïc Minier <[hidden email]>
Current Earth status:   NOT DESTROYED


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: drop pygtk alternative

Sebastien Bacher-2
In reply to this post by Loïc Minier
Le jeudi 02 mars 2006 à 14:10 +0100, Loïc Minier a écrit :

>  Ok, in summary, if both the 1.2 and 2.0 packages are installed, the
>  bahvior of import pygtk might change:
>
>  Now:
> A/ import pygtk => 1.2,           depend on python-gtk-1.2 [1]

No, atm that's an alternative:

# update-alternatives --display py2.3gtk.py
py2.3gtk.py - status is auto.
 link currently points
to /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python2.3-gtk2
/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python-gtk-1.2 - priority 100
/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python2.3-gtk2 - priority 123
Current `best' version
is /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python2.3-gtk2.

So if you have both installed it uses gtk2.0 by default at the moment.
What the change is going to drop is the possibility to set 1.2 manually.
The question is to know if anybody still sets that version as default
for etch...


>  And would switch to:
>  python2.3-gtk-1.2:
>    /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python-gtk-1.2
>  python2.3-gobject:
>    /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygtk.py.python2.3-gobject
>  python2.4-gobject:
>    /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/pygtk.py.python2.4-gobject

No, the switch would be:
python2.3-gtk-1.2: no pygtk
python-gobject: pygtk.py

Or something like that


>  That's a bit surprising, I don't understand why pygtk.py has to move
>  from the python-gtk2 package to the python-gobject package.

Because it's used to set the default version for pygobject too and you
may have python-gobject without pygtk installed and use
pygtk.require('')


Cheers,

Sebastien Bacher



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]