On Dec/18, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > common way to package python application that also ship a module would > be to put the /usr/bin/foo in a 'foo' binary, and the python module > /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/foo in a 'python-foo' binary. I > believe you're also getting lintian tags for this, don't you? > > Also, considering that python2 is (slowly) coming to its end you should > consider building the python3 module instead of the python2 one (or > together).
You are right on both counts. I've packaged python-jsbeautifier (along with a slew of other python dependencies) with the sole goal of being able to have mitmproxy in Debian. However, I unfortunately have very little time to properly care for those dependencies, considering my other duties. Would you maybe like to adopt python-jsbeautifier, in which case I'd gladly hand it over ? A patch would also do of course. Thanks a lot for your time, cheers, --Seb
