There are a lot of advantages to this idea, and I wonder if it might
make distributions easier and allow fuller control by the user. In
particular, kubuntu could default to using the qt backend while
regular ubuntu could use gym.
However, how practical is this to implement? What does it require
from us upstream?
On Friday, February 11, 2011, Jouni K. Seppänen <jks@...278...> wrote:
[Crossposting to matplotlib devel list]
Robert Kern <robert.kern@...149...> writes:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:22, Barry Warsaw <barry@...147...> wrote:
Here's the problem: for Ubuntu, we've had to disable the building of
the numpy documentation package, because its dependencies violate
Ubuntu policy. Numpy is in our "main" archive but the documentation
depends on python-matplotlib, which lives in our "universe"
archive. Such cross archive dependencies break the build.
We can't put python-matplotlib in main because of *its* dependencies.
As a digression, I think the python-matplotlib dependencies could be
significantly reduced. For a number of use cases (this is one of them,
but there are others), you don't need any GUI backend. Independent of
this issue, it would be great to be able to install python-matplotlib
in a headless server environment without pulling in all of those GUI
bits. Looking at the list of the hard dependencies, I don't understand
why half of them are there.
Would it make sense to split out each interactive backend to its own
Ubuntu package, e.g. python-matplotlib-tk, etc? Each of these would
depend on the relevant toolkit packages, and python-matplotlib would
have a much shorter list of dependencies.
Jouni K. Seppänen
NumPy-Discussion mailing list