Package Details: python39 3.9.19-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/python39.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: python39
Description: Major release 3.9 of the Python high-level programming language
Upstream URL: https://www.python.org/
Licenses: PSF-2.0
Submitter: rixx
Maintainer: rixx
Last Packager: rixx
Votes: 24
Popularity: 0.39
First Submitted: 2021-12-13 11:56 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-03-23 08:41 (UTC)

Dependencies (16)

Sources (2)

Latest Comments

1 2 3 4 Next › Last »

rixx commented on 2023-11-07 14:39 (UTC)

@den4ik_ept1 That is incorrect. patch is part of base-devel which is to be assumed present for AUR packages.

den4ik_ept1 commented on 2023-11-07 11:42 (UTC) (edited on 2023-11-07 11:42 (UTC) by den4ik_ept1)

Hello! The "patch" build dependency also needs to be added to the PKGBUILD file

Non critical but will be nice :)

rixx commented on 2023-10-11 09:07 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice! I was a bit on the fence about this, since the pythonXY naming convention has been around for (IIRC) at least since the python24 package. In this case, I think I'll follow the lead and reasoning of soh over in python310, for general consistency.

MarsSeed commented on 2023-10-09 12:16 (UTC)

Please kindly rename this package to python-3.9 to conform to Arch package naming guidelines (to the requirement that calls for attaching only the major version number directly to the package name, which in this case is 3 - three -, not 39 - thirty nine).

Also please remove the provides field. It is useless, and this package is not a drop-in replacement of repo's python package. Also, AUR helpers don't support versioned provides lookup.

Some good examples from repo:

Thank you in advance for your cooperation, and for maintaining this package.

xiota commented on 2023-06-10 17:44 (UTC) (edited on 2023-06-10 17:44 (UTC) by xiota)

Some maintainers reply to say they're busy and will get to issues later. AUR really needs flags for different statuses. "Out of date" is less important than being broken for various reasons.

As far as I can tell, package is working fine now. I also see that you've updated python312.

rixx commented on 2023-06-10 12:34 (UTC)

Not really offended, more feeling like it's misusing the feature – I'm currently at a conference, so four days isn't a ton of time.

I do have my contact info and everything in the PKGBUILD, so an out-of-date flag felt more like it'd look misleading to people. (Though I see the point about people not responding, no hard feelings at all, and I appreciate your patience with me missing your point like an idiot haha)

xiota commented on 2023-06-10 10:54 (UTC)

Thank you for updating.

Seems you were offended by being flagged. From what I've seen, most maintainers who do not respond to comments within a couple days do not respond at all. They most likely have notifications disabled. However, most do respond to flags. So if there is no response to comments within 3-5 days, I will flag, which also serves as email notification. Packages with out of date dependencies and other issues are technically out of date, even though it's not necessarily reflected by the version number.

rixx commented on 2023-06-10 10:24 (UTC)

Ah yeah sorry, I only looked at optdepends and forgot all about makedepends. My bad!

rixx commented on 2023-06-10 07:43 (UTC)

tkinter is an optdepend for this reason – there are plenty of distros that have tk as optional dependency, see for example ubuntu, where you install python3-tk, Fedora with python3-tkinter, brew, Windows, etc.

Having tkinter as optdepend is imo exactly the correct way to handle this (not everybody wants or needs tk in their Python).

(Side note: I don't think marking the package as out-of-date because you didn't receive a response in four days is the way to go in situations like this. To quote the wiki:

First, you should flag the package out-of-date indicating details on why the package is outdated, preferably including links to the release announcement or the new release tarball. You should also try to reach out to the maintainer directly by email. If there is no response from the maintainer after two weeks, you can file an orphan request. See AUR submission guidelines#Requests for details.)