From owner-freebsd-python@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 30 14:08:50 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-python@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 233B316A4CE for ; Sun, 30 May 2004 14:08:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fluid.sparcs.net (dor22235.kaist.ac.kr [143.248.222.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 930AB43D62 for ; Sun, 30 May 2004 14:08:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tinuviel@fluid.sparcs.net) Received: from tinuviel by fluid.sparcs.net with local (Exim 4.34) id 1BUXX5-0004VQ-JV; Mon, 31 May 2004 06:07:51 +0900 Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 06:07:51 +0900 To: python-list@python.org, debian-python@lists.debian.org, freebsd-python@freebsd.org, catalog-sig@python.org Message-ID: <20040530210751.GA17302@fluid.sparcs.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i From: Seo Sanghyeon Subject: Table of Python Packages X-BeenThere: freebsd-python@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Python issues List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 21:08:50 -0000 For those who may be concerned: this mail is sent to comp.lang.python, debian-python, freebsd-python, and catalog-sig. I created a table of Python packages in Debian, FreeBSD, and Gentoo. http://sparcs.kaist.ac.kr/~tinuviel/pypackage/list.cgi The table is created as follow: first I made a list of all packages in Debian Python section, Freebsd Python category, and Gentoo dev-python. And I checked equivalence by hand, alphabetically sorted packages by name, and wrote a small cgi script to create a table and make links to package description pages. Sources and data are located at the directory: http://sparcs.kaist.ac.kr/~tinuviel/pypackage/ What do you think about this? Is this a good idea? If it is a good idea, how can it be made more useful? Now I am thinking about adding NetBSD packages and PyPI references... This table shows which modules are not packaged for distributions. Those modules would be good candidates for packaing. Perhaps maintainers may learn from the each other. Any other thoughts?