Re: Proposed Mass Bug Filing: Renaming "python-" binary packages to "python2-"

Przemek Klosowski <przemek.klosowski@xxxxxxxx> · Mon, 19 Jun 2017 12:49:39 -0400



    On 06/19/2017 10:50 AM, Iryna
      Shcherbina wrote:

    
    The reason behind the second change is that there are a lot
      of Python 2 only packages having `python-xxx` in Requires, which
      will start pulling Python 3 dependencies when we switch to Python
      3 as default. This will most possibly cause a number of unexpected
      issues, which is what we are trying to avoid.
      

      If you expect your package to work when we switch to Python 3 as
      default, then you should already switch it to Python 3 or provide
      a Python 3 subpackage and depend on `python3-xxx`.
      

    It seems to me that there are two kinds of Python packages affected 
    by this issue: some track the evolution of the ecosystem and make
    sure they work with both Python 2 and 3, while the others assume a
    specific environment, and expect the user to conform to that. What I
    dislike about this proposal is that it imposes on the first kind:
    their package name needs to change, presumably to 'pyton3-xxx' even
    though the package might work with python2 as well. This sounds like
    penalizing the good behavior.

     
    Is it possible to modify the proposal scope to only affect  the
    Python 2-only packages? I realize that it makes it harder to police
    compliance, but the sanction is that the stragglers will fail, and
    will need to get fixed by either porting, or specifying better
    Requires.

    
    In the end, I think the right approach should be to choose which
    approach results in less overall work to the packagers: a big
    mandatory upfront change, or voluntary incremental mods, and mopping
    up the problems when they start showing up.

    
      Iryna
      

      On 06/19/2017 04:11 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
      

      On
        19/06/17 14:59, Iryna Shcherbina wrote:
        

        Recently,
          there were two important changes to Python packaging
          guidelines. The first one bans usingtheambiguous `python`
          prefix in binary RPM package names [1]. Thus you must
          explicitly definethePython version by using either `python2-`
          or `python3-`. The second change bans depending on anything
          using the ambiguous `python-` prefixed names in
          (Build)Requires [2].
          

        I don't understand the logic behind the second change with
        regard to Requires, or at least I think there are cases where it
        makes no sense.
        

        If I have a package with a python script using #!/usr/bin/python
        and importing xxx then isn't python-xxx the correct thing to
        require so that it will continue to behave correctly when we
        switch to python 3 as default?
        

        If I change it to python2-xxx then I'll just have to change it
        again when we switch the default?
        

        Tom
        

      _______________________________________________
      

      devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
      

      To unsubscribe send an email to
      devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
      

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx