Re: Only one Python 3.x at a time?

["Dr. Thomas Orgis" <thomas.orgis%uni-hamburg.de@localhost>]

Am Fri, 12 Apr 2019 14:38:04 +0200
schrieb Thomas Klausner <wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost>:

> > How many other packages will await me? I'll try, but my mood is
> > somewhere below bottom, spending too much time building software.  
> 
> I don't think too many.

So this means splitting up py-cairo into variants for 2 and 3, then
further splitting those (maybe skipping 2.x, as there is only Python
2.7 around) into common and non-common parts?

When the name changes to py-cairo3, I also need to check and adapt
stuff depending on it.  Looking at this list, and considering that
people quickly resort to their virtualenv for the whole list of Python
cruft they need, I take a step back from that and am compelled to say
that it's enough for me to have python 3.6 with a set of packages and
python 3.7 with somewhat less of them.

I just cannot justify spending time on breaking up those python
packages and testing them, sorry. But for anyone remotely interested in
working with Python, the plan seems to be clear. About that plan:

I don't see the point in creating a separate py-cairo3 package. The
py-cairo package should just depend on a py-cairo-common package that
in turn decides which common files it presents based on PYPKGPREFIX.
The name py-cairo turns into pyXY-cairo as usual and installs only
the non-conflicting files, as always.

The approach with py-gobject3 breaks the nice scheme pkgsrc has with
the python-version-agnostic dependency tree. This should be avoided.

But as I said, I need to prioritize my time. I'll get by with only the
full tree for 3.6 now.


Alrighty then,

Thomas

-- 
Dr. Thomas Orgis
HPC @ Universität Hamburg