Dne 7.12.2016 v 14:46 Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 8:13 AM, James Hogarth <james.hogarth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 7 December 2016 at 13:07, Jakub Jedelsky <jakub.jedelsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 11:48:55AM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 10:48 AM, James Hogarth <james.hogarth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> On 7 December 2016 at 09:39, Jakub Jedelsky <jakub.jedelsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi there,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm maintainer of vertica-python package and want to add support for
>>>>>> python3, but I'm a little bit lost in naming.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I named package as a upstream 'vertica-python', because (if I remember
>>>>>> correctly) naming guidelines told, that if upstream has 'python' in
>>>>>> the name it should stay there (can't found the source now). But how
>>>>>> should I name python3 package? Should it be 'python3-vertica-python'
>>>>>> od 'vertica-python3'?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or should I rename package to python{3,2}-vertica and obsolete
>>>>>> vertica-python?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well the name in setup.py is vertica-python and it installs as
>>>>> vertica_python and the pip install is that as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> So according to the guidelines I'd expect it to by
>>>>> python2-vertica-python and python3-vertica-python even if it sounds a
>>>>> little awkward, best way to handle anything that might end up
>>>>> depending on it etc
>>>> IMO this is worst thing. I think having pythonX-vertica is better.
>>> I just sniffed around repos and found just one package with a weird
>>> name - it's python3-python-etcd. On the other hand I found a few, which
>>> are in style <name>-python3, e.g. abrt-python3, libvirt-python3. So it
>>> looks, that this naming should be quite good.
>>>
>>
>> Those two examples are probably wrong:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming?rd=Packaging:NamingGuidelines
>>
>> Also you should read:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python
>>
>> according to that python{2,3}-vertica-python ought to be correct
> That should probably be slightly revisited, as now that we offer
> automatically generated Provides of the PyPI name with
> "python<pyver>dist(<modulename>)" form, we should start having a more
> consistent scheme for Python packages.
>
> Unless there's some kind of naming conflict, I'd call it pythonX-vertica.
>
>
>
Generally it is bad idea to differ from the name platform package
manager uses. We've been there with rubygem- packages, this is one example:
https://rubygems.org/gems/ruby-net-ldap
https://rubygems.org/gems/net-ldap
As long as you keep the -python suffix, you are on the safe side ....
Vít
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
