[Python-modules-team] Bug#459716: sympy: Please split pyglet into a separate package
ondrej at certik.cz
Tue Jan 8 10:33:00 UTC 2008
On Jan 8, 2008 10:39 AM, Michael Hanke <michael.hanke at gmail.com> wrote:
> Package: sympy
> Severity: wishlist
> Hi sympy maintainers,
> I am one of the maintainers of the PyEPL package
> PyEPL upstream is planning to switch from PyGame to pyglet, therefore we
> were about to start packaging pyglet to satisfy this new dependency (no
> ITP so far, just started).
> More or less accidentally I discovered that pyglet is already included in the
> sympy package. This information is not easily available.
> IMHO it would be better to provide a separate package of pyglet instead
> of hiding it in sympy. pyglet is more of a PyGame replacement than a
> simple plotting toolkit. There is potentially a lot of software that
> might use pyglet without needing sympy at all (although a quick search
> in the Debian archive does not reveal any immediate candidate).
> However, soon PyEPL will depend on pyglet and I don't think that a
> package dependency on sympy is the proper way to deal with it.
> I'd be glad if we could discuss possible ways to go on from here.
No, the proper way, of course, is to package pyglet separately. We
include it in sympy
just because we include it in the upstream tarball (so that it's
in Debian we should create a separate package for pyglet. I just didn't have
time to do it.
So if you package pyglet, that'd be awesome.
We prepared the sympy upstream tarball in a way, so that it's easy to
the pyglet in debian/rules and depend on the one in Debian.
(There are actually some subtle issues, like that we need to have the latest
svn version of pyglet in sympy, due to some bugs in pyglet, that were fixed
recently, but this will settle in time.)
More information about the Python-modules-team