Debian Bug report logs - #455482
Please motivate inclusion in Debian

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Please motivate inclusion in Debian

Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:20:14 +0100

Package: pyzenity
Version: 0.1.4-1
Severity: serious

        Hi,

 When I discovered about this package in the list of new binaries on my
 system today, I was a bit in shock about the concept.  I think the ITP
 wasn't filed with reportbug and hence didn't Cc: debian-devel@.  This
 didn't give much room for discussion...  So I'm starting discussion
 here: would I have seen this ITP on debian-devel@, I would have
 strongly objected to the inclusion of pyzenity.

 Zenity is a shell / command-line utility wrapping Gtk+ to make it easy
 to have Gtk+ popups in shell programs.  You can consider zenity like
 some sort of shell bindings for Gtk+

 PyZenity wraps shell bindings around Gtk+ in Python.  This is
 complete crack to me.  We have PyGtk to wrap Gtk+ in Python.  If it's
 not "simple" enough, then please wrap it.  But don't wrap a shell
 command-line utility in Python.

 The ITP didn't mention any potential reverse dependency to pyzenity.
 So I'd like to hear from the maintainer/ITPer and/or the sponsor of
 this package about:
 - potential rdeps in Debian which would be impractical to port to PyGtk
 - actual value of these bindings instead of PyGtk

 Other people on the Debian GNOME channel found the concept of pyzenity
 laughable as well, even if they understood the desire for simple
 wrappers around widgets -- it was commonly agreed that a shell command
 is not the proper way to implement Python wrappers around widgets.

 In the mean time, I'm filing this RC bug against the package as I
 strongly object its inclusion in testing/our next release: it would
 require maintaining this package across Python transitions, and it
 generally bloats our archive / package list.

   Bye,
-- 
Loïc Minier

Message #10 received at 455482@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Brian Ramos" <BRamos@HBOI.edu>

To: <455482@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: PyZenity

Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 13:08:19 -0500

Hi All,

Well I originally wrote PyZenity and Loïc I completely agree with you but let me take a second and tell you how it came to being.  A few years ago I decided I wanted to learn how to use the new (in 2.4) subprocess module.  Now I needed a command that I could use to experiment with and I thought, "hey, what better program then Zenity."  It takes lots of parameters, has well defined return values, and I could experiment right from the interactive shell because it spawned a GUI.  So I wrote functions to call Zenity's widgets and played around for a bit exercising some of the features of subprocess.  When I was done I thought, "Maybe someone would be interested in this", so I documented it and threw it up on my website.  Lo and behold, a few people were and I occasionally get bug fixes for it.  So Siegfried-Angel found it useful to some degree and decided he wanted to make a deb package for it, which is great.

So, yes PyZenity is crack.  The "right" way to do it is to certainly use PyGtk, which I do in my own programs, but the purpose of the module was not to create a serious module to do GUIs in python, it was to experiment with subprocess.  That being said, quite a few people have told me it's been very useful because it's much easier to use when you want to write a quick script.  Do I think it should be included in Debian?  Probably not.  But creating a third party deb like Siegfried-Angel did is a decent idea if he finds it useful.  I'll be glad to host his deb on my website if it's not included in Debian.

- Brian

Software Engineer
Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution
5600 US 1 North, Fort Pierce, FL 34946
(772) 465-2400 x374

Message #15 received at 455482@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>

To: Brian Ramos <BRamos@HBOI.edu>, 455482@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Bernd Zeimetz <bernd@bzed.de>

Subject: Re: Bug#455482: PyZenity

Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:21:15 +0100

        Hi,

 NB: <bug-id>@bugs.debian.org only mails the maintainer, not the
 submitter.  <bug-id>-submitter@ mails both.

On Mon, Dec 10, 2007, Brian Ramos wrote:
>                                                              A few
> years ago I decided I wanted to learn how to use the new (in 2.4)
> subprocess module.
[...]
>                                           but the purpose of the
> module was not to create a serious module to do GUIs in python, it was
> to experiment with subprocess.
[...]

 Point a) One motivation was your own (to experiment with subprocess);
 Debian has obviously nothing to do with this.

> So, yes PyZenity is crack.  The "right" way to do it is to certainly
> use PyGtk, which I do in my own programs

 Point b) You agree that PyZenity is crack and not the right way to do
 things properly.

> Siegfried-Angel found it useful to some degree and decided he wanted
> to make a deb package for it, which is great.

 Point c) Siegfried-Angel finds it useful, and you claim other people do
 find it useful as well.

>                                         Do I think it should be
> included in Debian?  Probably not.

 Point d) You don't think it should be included in Debian.

 Summarizing, the only motivation to keep pyzenity is convenience, but
 at the same time we would acknowledge that relying on pyzenity is the
 improper way to do things.  I can imagine local scripts could use
 pyzenity, but there's no plan to have any Debian package depend on it.

 I would recommend hosting pyzenity packges outside of Debian or in an
 unofficial repository; I hope you understand why I'm unhappy that
 Debian would have to maintain and would advertize software which you
 and me consider the improper way to do things.

 I'd like to hear from the Maintainer and/or sponsor.  Cc:ing Bernd.  If
 they agree that pyzenity is best kept out of Debian, I'll file a
 removal request.

   Bye,
-- 
Loïc Minier

Message #20 received at 455482@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Bernd Zeimetz <bernd@bzed.de>

To: Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>

Cc: Brian Ramos <BRamos@HBOI.edu>, 455482@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#455482: PyZenity

Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:49:07 +0100

>  I would recommend hosting pyzenity packges outside of Debian or in an
>  unofficial repository; I hope you understand why I'm unhappy that
>  Debian would have to maintain and would advertize software which you
>  and me consider the improper way to do things.
> 
>  I'd like to hear from the Maintainer and/or sponsor.  Cc:ing Bernd.  If
>  they agree that pyzenity is best kept out of Debian, I'll file a
>  removal request.


Actually I found it very useful and I would appreciate if somebody would
come up with a replacement for the wrapper (as in: rewriting zenity
properly in py+gtk).
If upstream suggests not to ship it in Debian I have no objections
against a removal.

-- 
Bernd Zeimetz
<bernd@bzed.de>                         <http://bzed.de/>

Message #25 received at 455482@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Siegfried-Angel <siggi.gevatter@gmail.com>

To: "Bernd Zeimetz" <bernd@bzed.de>, 455482@bugs.debian.org, "Brian Ramos" <bramos@brianramos.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#455482: PyZenity

Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 23:47:17 +0100

Well, then I can't object neither... I'll upload it to my PPA for Ubuntu.

I've been thinking about it, and learning PyGTK is something I've
pending since a while... How much (time) do you think that it could
take to rewrite it properly up to the point of functionality it has
right now? (I'm just asking... Not sure if I'll work on it as
Ubuntu/Debian development is already taking a lot of time, and I've
other projects in progress, too).

Regards,

-- 
Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals (RainCT)
GNU/Linux User #438657. Ubuntu User #11680.

Message #30 received at 455482@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Brian Ramos <bramos@brianramos.com>

To: Siegfried-Angel <siggi.gevatter@gmail.com>, 455482@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Bernd Zeimetz <bernd@bzed.de>

Subject: Re: Bug#455482: PyZenity

Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:28:41 -0500

Actually, it looks like it would be pretty easy to implement properly in 
PyGTK.  I took a quick look at the source of Zenity last night and I see 
no problems with using Zenity's own glade file for the widgets and 
translating the C to Python.  It looks like a weekend project to me.

It might be a good project to get up to speed on PyGTK, Siegfried.  My 
wild guess is it'll take a few good days to learn what you need to 
rewrite it but it's definitely worth knowing if you use Python a lot. 
I'll be willing to take a crack at it if you don't have to time. 
Totally up to you.

Cheers,

Brian

Siegfried-Angel wrote:
> Well, then I can't object neither... I'll upload it to my PPA for Ubuntu.
> 
> I've been thinking about it, and learning PyGTK is something I've
> pending since a while... How much (time) do you think that it could
> take to rewrite it properly up to the point of functionality it has
> right now? (I'm just asking... Not sure if I'll work on it as
> Ubuntu/Debian development is already taking a lot of time, and I've
> other projects in progress, too).
> 
> Regards,
> 

Message #35 received at 455482@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@ubuntu.com>

To: 455482@bugs.debian.org

Cc: control@bugs.debian.org

Subject: RM: pyzenity -- RoM

Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 00:06:24 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

clone 455482 -1
reassign -1 ftp.debian.org
retitle -1 RM: pyzenity -- RoM
severity -1 normal
thanks

Hi ftp-masters,

Please, remove pyzenity from unstable. It's not part of Etch, and it hasn't
migrated to testing. It doesn't have any reverse dependency either.

The package is useless for Debian. The maintainer, the sponsor, and the upstream
author have agreed that while this package could be of some value locally, it's
not any useful for the distribution.

I'm thus requesting its removal as a member of the Python Applications Packaging
Team, which is an uploader of the package, and more importantly after contacting
the maintainer Siegfried and the sponsor Bernd and getting their ACK.

Thank you

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #42 received at 455482-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Marco Rodrigues <gothicx@sapo.pt>

To: 455482-done@bugs.debian.org

Subject: pyzenity has been removed from Debian, closing #455482

Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 14:19:59 +0100

Version: 0.1.4-1+rm

The pyzenity package has been removed from Debian testing, unstable and
experimental, so I am now closing the bugs that were still opened
against it.

For more information about this package's removal, read
http://bugs.debian.org/474181 . That bug might give the reasons why
this package was removed, and suggestions of possible replacements.

Don't hesitate to reply to this mail if you have any question.

Thank you for your contribution to Debian.

--
Marco Rodrigues
http://Marco.Tondela.org

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.