On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 05:51:39PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 28 July 2017 at 03:15, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Do you think it'd be possible to script the python-foo to python2-foo > > renaming? If yes, then maybe it'd make sense to just get some pps to > > do it in rawhide now and get the "easy" part done with? That should > > significantly cut down on the number of misnamed packages and let > > packagers spend their times on the ones where the automatic way is not > > obvious. > > I was going to ask whether it might be possible to tweak > http://fedora.portingdb.xyz/ to also report on compliance with the > naming policy, but then I went and saw that it *does* already report > on that: http://fedora.portingdb.xyz/namingpolicy/ > > While it also turns out the wiki page already links to that page, it > may be good to call it out a second time in a "How can I help?" > section. > > Checking an initial sampling of spec files (python-d2to1, > python-BeautfulSoup, python-amqplib) suggests to me that a script > implementing the following rules might offer a reasonably start point, > at least for Python-2-only modules that are remaining Python-2-only: > > - immediately before the first BuildRequires or Requires entry, add a > %package section header for "-n python2-<name>" (where "<name>" is the > lowercased package source name with any "python-" prefix stripped) > - add a %python_provides entry after the new package header in > accordance with the current guidelines > - if the original package provided a non-lowercase "python-*" > provides, remote it and add a second %python_provides with the > original capitalisation > - if the source package lacks the "python-" prefix, add a virtual > provides for the unqualified package name > - add a "-n python2-<name>" qualifier to any currently unqualified > description and files sections > > A script like that may even do a tolerable job for packages that *do* > offer Python 3 subpackages (since those will already have qualifiers, > and will necessarily appear after any unqualified runtime and build > requirements for the default subpackage). I hacked up a script, it's on pagure now [1]. See logs [2] and the diff [3] (unfortunately no highlighting on paste.fp.o.). This does 561 python-* packages, out of 645. I took the list from portingdb, but it seems partially outdated, 32 packages already have %python_provide python2-*. One more by hand (patch in repo). That leaves 51 packages to convert by hand (mostly because of conditionals which are too complicated to do automatically). So, please take a look at the diff [3]. If you want to adapt the script, ping me, and I'll add you to the repo. After I started working on this, I limited it to python-* packages, because those are easiest. There's 237 other packages on the portingdb list. I *would* be possible to make the script work for those packages which are pure python and just have an old name. I don't think it makes sense to do other packages which just have a python subpackage this way. This would be a good start, I think. Before being pushed anywhere, it'd need to be checked carefully of course and extended to some of the remaining packages. I'd apply this as one step, and rebuild everything. After that, it'd be easier to convert *dependencies*, because all or most python2- names should be available. Some time after current mass rebuild is done? Zbyszek [1] https://pagure.io/pyrenamer/tree/master [2] https://pagure.io/pyrenamer/blob/master/f/results.txt [3] https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/57oqggmOwvZFQjDbndRfcg _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
