search

astraw / stdeb

produce Debian packages from Python packages
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/stdeb
MIT License
495 stars 102 forks source link

Support for packages without setup.py #200

Open glemignot opened 3 months ago

glemignot commented 3 months ago

More and more Python packages are using pyproject.toml instead of setup.py. Is there any plan to add support for those to stdeb ? Or is there another project aiming to convert those into Debian packages ?

nuclearsandwich commented 3 months ago

The python packaging ecosystem seems to be in a state of heavy flux and I don't co-maintain any projects that are completely without a setup.py.

While that remains the case, support for such functionality would need to be driven by contributors. Is there a specific project that you'd use stdeb with but cannot because the project lacks setup.py?

WilliamDEdwards commented 3 months ago

Is there a specific project that you'd use stdeb with but cannot because the project lacks setup.py?

Pika, Typer.

nuclearsandwich commented 3 months ago

Thanks. Both pika and typer are available in Debian unstable, which means that packaging support for packages without setup.py exists upstream.

A brief spy of the debian/rules for typer also doesn't have anything too fancy. It could be that simplifying stdeb and switching it to use pybuild will help these to Just Work™️.

The amount of time that I have to dedicate to this is extremely uncertain, if you're interested in contributing these changes, I'd suggest subscribing to #198 as I imagine doing so will be much easier after that is in.

WilliamDEdwards commented 3 months ago

I don’t need to build them anymore, indeed. But up until Buster IIRC, the upstream repo’s versions were extremely outdated. It was fine at the time because the projects still had a setup.py, but other users might need patched versions or similar.

glemignot commented 3 months ago

Recently we had a need for https://pypi.org/project/django-pictures/, but we found another solution. More generally, I suspect there will be more and more Python packages not having a setup.py in the future, so this feature would likely get more useful as time goes, but I understand lack of time and manpower (I'm having the same issue...).

WilliamDEdwards commented 1 month ago

The amount of time that I have to dedicate to this is extremely uncertain, if you're interested in contributing these changes, I'd suggest subscribing to #198 as I imagine doing so will be much easier after that is in.

I'm not interested in contributing these changes due to a lack of time. However, I would be more than happy to support the project financially to get this done. Perhaps you or @astraw want to consider bounties?