Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Using / collaborating on python ports #2

Closed
m-kuhn opened this issue Jan 13, 2024 · 5 comments
Closed

Using / collaborating on python ports #2

m-kuhn opened this issue Jan 13, 2024 · 5 comments

Comments

@m-kuhn
Copy link

m-kuhn commented Jan 13, 2024

I am currently in the process of building an application (QGIS) including python support with various packages bundled.

The tremendous work that has been done within this repository will be very helpful.

I wonder what to best do:

  1. Using this (Neumann-A/my-vcpkg-ports) repository from the build
  2. Copy the (interesting) ports to another overlay
  3. Upstreaming ports to microsoft/vcpkg
  4. Creating a new registry [whatever]/vcpkg-python

I think the ideal world would be 3. but I guess you have your reasons for not having these ports upstreamed? 1. is not my favorite, as there is a lot going on in here and occasionally other ports will overlay upstream ports. 2. is duplicating efforts and a lot of forth and back. 4. seems to be a valid thing to do if there is genuine interest.

Opinions?

@Neumann-A
Copy link
Owner

Main aim would be to get numpy into vcpkg but there a few details which need to be considered.

I think the ideal world would be 3. but I guess you have your reasons for not having these ports upstreamed?

There is also a small discussion on discord starting at https://discord.com/channels/400588936151433218/687365466422902841/1186421038574227456

So if you want a more or less fast solution (4) is probably the way to go since I don't see any of the PRs being merged any time soon.

There are few things which need to be done for that:

  • Each python port should have a usage test in the form import * from <installed_module>. Need to figure out how to do that in/from packages though
  • naming of ports needs to be decided. I used python-<name> but that is basically just a suggestion
  • needs a decision on [whatever]. [whatever] should probably represent a group instead of a single person.

Note: I am currently unemployed so I have some time at hand to do whatever I like ;)

@m-kuhn
Copy link
Author

m-kuhn commented Jan 13, 2024

Thanks for the detailed description.

There is also a small discussion on discord starting at https://discord.com/channels/400588936151433218/687365466422902841/1186421038574227456

Didn't notice, looks promising

So if you want a more or less fast solution (4) is probably the way to go since I don't see any of the PRs being merged any time soon.

I like the pragmatism of this approach, and it doesn't exclude a gradual movement towards 1 either.

There are few things which need to be done for that:

  • Each python port should have a usage test in the form import * from <installed_module>. Need to figure out how to do that in/from packages though

Isn't that a nice to have, though?

  • naming of ports needs to be decided. I used python-<name> but that is basically just a suggestion

The few I was experimenting with were py3-<name>, inspired by alpine linux. I'm lazy, so I'm putting "less typing" forward as an argument. No strong opinion.

  • needs a decision on [whatever]. [whatever] should probably represent a group instead of a single person.

Indeed, I can't think of anything reasonable that exists already, a new org vcpkg-contrib or vcpkg-python?

Note: I am currently unemployed so I have some time at hand to do whatever I like ;)

I didn't expect myself to respond with this line to "I am currently unemployed", but: glad to hear.

@Neumann-A
Copy link
Owner

I like the pragmatism of this approach, and it doesn't exclude a gradual movement towards 1 either.

You mean 3 ?

Isn't that a nice to have, though?

It is to make sure the python packages are actually working and have the correct dependencies. While doing all the python stuff I often came across missing dependencies in a 2nd run due to me having all other deps already installed by a different port.

Indeed, I can't think of anything reasonable that exists already, a new org vcpkg-contrib or vcpkg-python?

It should probably be more general than vcpkg-python making sure it can be used for other stuff. vcpkg-contrib would be a possibility. open-vcpkg sounds a bit better to me (and is shorter :) ) . We could open a discussion in vcpkg and ask other contributors for a name and then have a vote on it.

The few I was experimenting with were py3-, inspired by alpine linux. I'm lazy, so I'm putting "less typing" forward as an argument. No strong opinion.

Question is: Does it need the version number?

@m-kuhn
Copy link
Author

m-kuhn commented Jan 13, 2024

I like the pragmatism of this approach, and it doesn't exclude a gradual movement towards 1 either.

You mean 3 ?

Correct 🙈

Isn't that a nice to have, though?

It is to make sure the python packages are actually working and have the correct dependencies. While doing all the python stuff I often came across missing dependencies in a 2nd run due to me having all other deps already installed by a different port.

I'm not arguing that the idea is bad

Indeed, I can't think of anything reasonable that exists already, a new org vcpkg-contrib or vcpkg-python?

It should probably be more general than vcpkg-python making sure it can be used for other stuff. vcpkg-contrib would be a possibility. open-vcpkg sounds a bit better to me (and is shorter :) ) . We could open a discussion in vcpkg and ask other contributors for a name and then have a vote on it.

I like this idea 👍

The few I was experimenting with were py3-, inspired by alpine linux. I'm lazy, so I'm putting "less typing" forward as an argument. No strong opinion.

Question is: Does it need the version number?

Not necessarily

@m-kuhn
Copy link
Author

m-kuhn commented Mar 12, 2024

https://github.com/open-vcpkg/ is live 🎉

@m-kuhn m-kuhn closed this as completed Mar 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants