joehealy at gmail.com
Sun May 12 11:28:07 UTC 2013
Forgot to reply all.
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Julian Taylor
<jtaylor.debian at googlemail.com> wrote:
> I started to look at pyzmq based on zmq3.
> I would like to also add pypy support. The easiest way to do this
> without bloating the debian/rules is to use the new pybuild build helper.
> Unfortunately the way pybuild is packaged now and probably also in
> future will make backporting of it very hard to impossible (at least in
> derivatives like Ubuntu with much stricter backporting rules).
> Do you have any backporting plans regarding pyzmq3?
I've been thinking about it this weekend, but have not come to any
firm conclusions on the best way to do so.
I had been potentially looking at backporting it and hosting outside
of debian, but had been wanting to find the cleanest and least
clashing way to do so. I wasn't really happy with any of the options -
change of package name, change of package versions, ensuring no
clashes, clean upgrade path etc...
As a result, I haven't done anything with it yet.
> For my purposes zeromq2 is sufficient, so I have no plans.
> But if you want to do it its possibly better I do a traditional
> dh_python2 upload first and later update to pybuild with pypy support.
>From my perspective, I think this would be best.
It get a key dependency for salt backported more quickly and in the
case of salt prevent people doing hacky workarounds.
I believe one of the dependencies is cython. Do you know if it needs
to be backported or if the version in squeeze/wheezy is sufficient for
pyzmq3 in those releases?
Is this something I can assist with?
Thanks very much,
More information about the pkg-salt-team