Re: EPEL7 python3/python36 standardization

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:19:39AM -0600, Carl George wrote:
> Howdy folks,
> 
> RHEL7 ships Python 3.6 packages using the python3 prefix.  Currently
> EPEL7 contains Python 3.6 packages using both the python3 and python36
> prefixes.  Thanks to the foresight and preparation work of the Red Hat
> Python Maintenance team, these work interchangeably when using the
> %python_provide macro.  However the situation is still confusing for
> packagers and users.  We never formalized guidelines on which prefix
> to use.  I would like to change that.  I propose that we standardize
> on the python3 prefix to match RHEL7 packages and document in EPEL
> guidelines that maintainers SHOULD use the python3 prefix.
> 
> Transitioning packages is straightforward.  Packages using a
> python%{python3_pkgversion}-<name> subpackage can simply rename it to
> python3-<name>.  If the top level package is already python3-<name>,
> then the subpackage can be converted into the top level package.  In
> both cases, `%python_provide python3-<name>` handles the necessary
> provides and obsoletes.  This work doesn't need to happen all at once,
> and maintainers can opt in as they have time.  We already have a mix
> of prefixes, this is just about nudging towards python3 as the correct
> prefix.
> 
> Please share your feedback, and I'll present this proposal and the
> feedback to the EPEL Steering Committee.

Seems like anoying churn to change them, but I guess standardizing is
good. Perhaps we could generate a list of python36 and python34
subpackages that need changing and make a tracker bug and the
epel-packagers sig could drive forward filing bugs/pr's/just fixing
these?

For epel8: I see there's one python38 package in epel8 ( python38-radicale3 ) 
do we want to also standardize there also to python3-name? Since there's
multiple python stacks there we really might have need for being more
specific there, so that might be fine, but we should probibly note it.

kevin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora QA]     [Fedora Triage]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Apps]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Maemo Users]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux